By 'something' I mean either omission of the protocol, or 'all' to be
specified instead of the protocol to mean no matching on protocol would be
made (in other words the protocol to be disregarded). This will be especially
useful for sets with quite a few number of members and will avoid unnecessary
duplication - as things stand I have to add the same number of members for
both tcp and udp protocols when I don't need any protocol matching - just the
subnets and port numbers I specified. Is this doable?
Use set types without port sub-part, like hash:net or hash:ip, etc.
I don't really see why you would want to use a type with port and then
ignore it.
I don't want to ignore the port - that stays (I need it to do the
matching). I want to ignore the protocol, but keep the subnet and port
number matches.
As I already mentioned, I see the need to register 2x as many members to
a particular set just to get the match required (i.e. ignore the
protocol) unnecessary when the alternative is to a) do not use protocol
definition; or b) use another word (I suggested 'all') to ignore the
protocol match and just use the subnet and port number(s) instead.
Wouldn't you agree that this is a better solution than registering twice
as many members in a particular set in order to get the match I need?
--
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
