On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 12:11:32PM +0200, Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote: > On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Balazs Scheidler wrote: > > > Let me think a bit about it. For UDP packets I don't really need > > conntracking sessions, I only need to translate single packets, but I'd like > > to avoid messing with IP and UDP header translation myself. > > > > So NOTRACK is good for me, I don't need NONAT since I don't need conntrack > > either. The question is how you mark an skb to avoid tracking? (an idea was > > to use a flag in nfct, is it still true?) > > No, I'll go with Rusty's solution: a dummy conntrack entry is used. > > > Is you patch available somewhere? > > Not yet, but real soon I'll post it :-).
Can you send me what you have available? I'd like to close my transparency project, and so I'd be willing to contribute to the conntrack exemption project :) -- Bazsi PGP info: KeyID 9AF8D0A9 Fingerprint CD27 CFB0 802C 0944 9CFD 804E C82C 8EB1
