>On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 02:57:30PM +0200, Hans Schillstrom wrote: >> On Monday 07 May 2012 14:22:32 Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >> > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 02:09:46PM +0200, Hans Schillstrom wrote: >> > > On Monday 07 May 2012 13:56:12 Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >> > > > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 11:14:34AM +0200, Hans Schillstrom wrote: >> > > > > > > We have plenty of rules where just source port mask is zero. >> > > > > > > and the dest-port-mask is 0xfffc (or 0xffff) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > 0xffff and 0x0000 means on/off respectively. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Still curious, how can 0xfffc be useful? >> > > > > >> > > > > That's a special case where an appl is using 4 ports. >> > > > > But in general, have not seen other than "on/off" except for above. >> > > > >> > > > I see. Well I'm fine with this way to switch on/off things, just >> > > > wanted some clafication. >> > > > >> > > > Still one final thing I'd like to remove before inclusion: >> > > > >> > > > + union hmark_ports port_mask; >> > > > + union hmark_ports port_set; >> > > > + __u32 spi_mask; >> > > > + __u32 spi_set; >> > > > >> > > > the spi_mask seems redundant. The port_mask already provides u32 for >> > > > it. >> > > >> > > No problems, I'll remove it. >> > >> > OK. As a nice side-effect, this will lead to removing the branch that >> > tests ESP/AH in hmark_set_tuple_ports. >> > >> Yes, only check if not ESP or AH to swap src/dst > >Do you really that branch? I mean, unless I'm missing anything, swapping >them shouldn't be a problem. Well, that was just to keep backward compatibility and make my tests happy. I'll remove them and change my test setup. -- 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
