On Tue, 2019-09-03 at 18:49 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:46:50PM -0300, Leonardo Bras wrote: > > On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 22:58 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > > Hello Pablo, > > > > Any trouble with this patch? > > I could see the other* one got applied, but not this one. > > *(The other did not get acked, so i released it alone as v5) > > > > Is there any fix I need to do in this one? > > Hm, I see, so this one: > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1156100/ > > is not enough? By what I could understand of Florian e-mail, we would need both: >> So, given I don't want to plaster ipv6_mod_enabled() everywhere, I >> would suggest this course of action: >> >> 1. add a patch to BREAK in nft_fib_netdev.c for !ipv6_mod_enabled() >> 2. change net/bridge/br_netfilter_hooks.c, br_nf_pre_routing() to >> make sure ipv6_mod_enabled() is true before doing the ipv6 stack >> "emulation". Is that ok? > > I was expecting we could find a way to handle this from br_netfilter > alone itself. > > Thanks. Thank you!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
