> > So I guess there is some value in these patches for those users to > > extend their filtering with VRF support. > > A single xt_slavedev module only for this is too much overhead, if > you find an existing extension (via revision infrastructure) where > you can make this fit in, I would consider this. The only feasible candidate I see is the physdev match. However, there is not much in common code-wise. And from a user perspective, slavedev matching via physdev and the interaction between these functionalities just makes that confusing. So for now I'll keep the slavedev match out-of-tree, then. Thanks, Martin
