NetFilter
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Time module included in the default Fedora

To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Subject: Re: Time module included in the default Fedora
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 19:34:53 +0200 (MEST)
Cc: Netfilter Mailing List <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org>
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: netfilter-list1@securepoint.com
In-reply-to: <461D0DD7.7050408@trash.net>
List-archive: </pipermail/netfilter>
List-help: <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=help>
List-id: General discussion and user questions <netfilter.lists.netfilter.org>
List-post: <mailto:netfilter@lists.netfilter.org>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>, <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>, <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <b317600c0704110750x30861e6ft6cd0a53d415cba74@mail.gmail.com> <b317600c0704110752g2f9a82a1x8b18adaae15f775e@mail.gmail.com>, <1165438164.4846.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0704111749490.32056@yvahk01.tjqt.qr> <461D0DD7.7050408@trash.net>
Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
Hi,

On Apr 11 2007 18:33, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
>The question whether to merge the time module came up repeatedely
>at netfilter workshops, but it was always decided against it so far,
>mainly because it apparently can't deal with timezones and daylight
>saving time.

Why, let iptables, or more precisely, ipt_time.c, handle timezones,
and pass an UTC value to the kernel -- that's what it is best at
dealing with.

>IIRC Harald had strong feelings about it, I personally
>don't care much about this shortcoming as long as its documented.
>I'm not even sure its correct since the kernel has sys_tz. So if
>anyone finds out and submits a patch, I'll consider it.
>
>> Though that leaves me puzzled why connlimit has not gone in yet
>> (it all simplifies maintenance so much IMO). BTW, how about it?
>
>As I stated multiple times, the reason why its not included is that
>its horribly slow. But since I don't see any better way to do this
>and I know quite a few people are using this, I would consider this
>as well if someone sends me a patch, which has not happened so far.

So it's just that I need to pull the pomng code and make a diff out
of it, is that all? (Plus any compilation and perhaps runtime fixes,
of course.)


Jan
-- 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>