On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:28 AM, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Saturday 2010-07-24 13:47, Changli Gao wrote: > >>On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Saturday 2010-07-24 06:29, Changli Gao wrote: >>> >>>>update libxt_length to revision 1 to support ipv6 jumbo frames. >>> >>> You can't just go and change these things, would break xt_length v0. >>> >> >>Hmm. I have updated the patch(attached), but the v0 handlers are not >>called. Is there anything I missed? Or Is there a bug in iptables? > > Probably because you are still breaking the compatibility by editing > struct xt_length_info. I am sure it isn't the problem. The kernel module can work with the old iptables binary. However after I committed the rules with the revision 1, I can't get the correct output with the command 'iptables-save' or 'iptables -nvL'. I checked the code of iptables, and found it doesn't check the revision when founding matches and targets, and even the kernel seems doesn't transfer the revision info to user space. > I'd say let's concentrate on rev 2 that I > submitted. > I have seen it. Thanks. -- Regards, Changli Gao(xiaosuo@xxxxxxxxx) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
