On 1 September 2015 at 14:31, Alexandr Nedvedicky
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
>> > As a side effect the patch breaks block rules with dup-to action. dup-to
>> > action as a part of block rule might make some sense... So if there is
>> > someone, who really needs block ... dup-to he should opt for equivalent
>> > rule using pass ... route-to
>> >
>> > Also there is one more question:
>> >
>> >    shall we implement similar sanity checks for nat-to/rdr-to/... actions?
>>
>> IMHO, yes that would make sense.
>>
>
> I'll try to keep it on my todo list...
>
>> Some bike shedding inline below, apart from that, ok jung@
>
> I love bike shedding, so let's go an pick up some colors ;-)
>
[snip]
> as you can see there are two colors to chose from:
>
>     color A:
>         ... is not supported on ... rules (used at 4003, 4007, 4016
>
>     color B:
>         ... must not be used on match rules (used at line 4911)
>
> we have three options:
>
>     1) leave it as it is (both colors will be used)
>
>     2) use color A
>
>     3) use color B
>
> IMO consistency is good here. I prefer color A as it sounds more polite.
>

Me too.

> updated patch is further below.
>

Looks OK to me.

> regards
> sasha
>
> --------8<---------------8<---------------8<------------------8<--------
>

Reply via email to