On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 11:58:03AM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > Arturo Borrero Gonzalez <art...@debian.org> wrote: > > I'm curious, What is the use case of using both nftables and iptables > > at the same time? > > Some missing functionality in nft? > > Perhaps some ipt->nft partial migration procedure? > > Yes, partial migration. > > Right now there are an awful lot of tools out there (docker, libvirt, > kubernetes, ..) that call iptables(-restore) directly (or inject them via > firewalld). > > And unfortunately I don't see how we can magically move all of this > to nftables. > > So allowing to do a step-by-step migration seems the only viable > option.
We have iptables-compat-restore, this uses the nf_tables netlink frontend and packet classification code, plus x_tables extensions to run iptables code. It should allow us to schedule the x_tables core for removal at some point. In Montpellier, we mentioned that distro could add a iptables-restore symlink to iptables-compat-restore so it becomes visible that we're relying on the compat infrastructure. This iptables-compat-restore interacts with nft via translate layer, so if you just 'nft list ruleset' after using iptables-compat-restore, you will get a translation (if available). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
