Re: [question] ipt_CLUSTERIP and address length

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

 



Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 01:54:50PM CET, jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>On Thursday 2010-02-25 13:18, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I want to ask if there is any particular reason for ipt_CLUSTERIP to support
>>>> only address length of 6 (ETH_ALEN)? It seems to me reasonable for this to work
>>>> even with another types of network hw with different addr_len.
>>> 
>>> None that I'm aware of, but the length is also used in the ABI,
>>> so you presently can't supply larger addresses.
>>
>>Not directly related to this but I wanted to discuss this time ago. Now
>>that we have xt_CLUSTER I think that we can deprecate ipt_CLUSTERIP.
>
>xt_CLUSTER - where in the tree would that be?

I was trying to find it too. I guess it stands out of it (at least net-next).
--
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