On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 02:30:40PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 02:00:48PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 01:20:50PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 06:39:14PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > > > @@ -565,6 +574,8 @@ static const struct option options[] = { > > > > {.name = "counters", .has_arg = false, .val = 'c'}, > > > > {.name = "trace", .has_arg = false, .val = 't'}, > > > > {.name = "event", .has_arg = false, .val = 'e'}, > > > > + {.name = "arp", .has_arg = false, .val = '0'}, > > > > + {.name = "bridge", .has_arg = false, .val = '1'}, > > > > > > Probably? > > > > > > -A for arp. > > > -B for bridge. > > > > > > so users don't have to remember? -4 and -6 are intuitive, I'd like > > > these are sort of intuitive too in its compact definition. > > > > > > Apart from that, patchset looks good to me. > > > > I had something like that (-a and -b should still be free), but then > > discovered that for rules there was '-0' prefix in use when printing arp > > family rules. Should I change these prefixes also or leave them as -0 > > and -1? I guess most importantly they must not clash with real > > parameters. > > You can just leave them as is if this is the way this is exposed in > rules. Not sure what the logic behing -0 and -1 is, this is not > mapping to NFPROTO_* definitions, so it looks like something it's been > pulled out of someone's hat :-) > > I think users will end up using --arp and --bridge for this. I myself > will not remember this -0 and -1 thing. Probably exposing: iptables-monitor ip6tables-monitor arptables-monitor ebtables-monitor although this will not solve the problem that we are discussing here, I think having those around would be nice. The xtables-monitor variant still will need to sort out the -0 and -1 thing that we're discussing here. > Feel free to explore any possibility, probably leaving the existing -0 > and -1 in place if you're afraid of breaking anything, add aliases and > only document the more intuitive one. If you think this is worth > exploring, of course.