jamal wrote: > Another approach could have been to add the mask as part of the hashing. > and you add the new hash field not in the head rather in the filter. At > runtime, you hash - walk the bucket and compare the mask as well as the > index.
That doesn't work. To what do you compare it? We have a mark from the packet .. but no mask. And we don't want to compare the mask but use it to mask the mark value. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
