On 02/03/2020 13:20, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > 2) explicit counter action, in this case the user specifies explicitly > that it needs a counter in a given position of the rule. This > counter might come before or after the actual action. But the existing API can already do this, with a gact pipe. Plus, Jiri's new API will allow specifying a counter on any action (rather than only, implicitly, those which have .stats_update()) should that prove to be necessary. I really think the 'explicit counter action' is a solution in search of a problem, let's not add random orthogonality violations. (Equally if the counter action had been there first, I'd be against adding counters to the other actions.) -ed
