Re: POM Xtables???

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/01/08 09:10, Patrick McHardy wrote:
In any case, its unreasonable to expect us to never *extend* (not change) the output to accomodate buggy parsers. This is by the way the same way that is often used to extend binary structures, even though someone stupid might use exact size checks.

*nod*

Agreed.

However as I sit here and think about it, it may be worth adding a new field *as early as possible* (read closes to the start of line) in the field list that indicates a version, which can be used to determine the fields and their position there in. This would make it very easy for people to write strict parsers down the road. A simple three character hex field (4 bytes including the leading space) would allow for 4k of strict layouts. (Even more 0-9 and a-z or additionally A-Z.) Just a thought.



Grant. . . .
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Netfilter Development]     [Linux Kernel Networking Development]     [Netem]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Advanced Routing & Traffice Control]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux