Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-16 Thread jidanni
You people are lucky you have me on board. Because I am a very simple minded person. All I know is I use some thing documented there on the iptables man page, and I get a warning. I noticed that warning because I happened to look in /var/log/syslog one day. The warning says something worse will

Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-16 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Sep 16, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > This bug should *NOT* be closed. Getting a deprecation warning for a simple > and > common use of iptables is a bug somewhere, either in iptables or the kernel. Sometimes life is just not how we would like it to be, and by accepting this you could save much ange

Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-16 Thread Bernd Zeimetz
Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Sep 14, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: > >> LB> You could file this a a wishlist bug report against the iptables >> LB> package, and see if the maintainer wish to add this file (or a larger >> LB> /etc/sysctl.d/iptables.conf with some sane defaults). > What makes you believe

Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-15 Thread jidanni
LB> Prey tell, what is wrong with maintainers of for example iptables, LB> providing a conffile with samples (which may even be commented out) LB> which they can reference to in their documentation, where they LB> comment on the different settings? LB> This is what we do with /etc/sysctl.conf toda

Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-15 Thread Lars Bahner
2009/9/15 Marco d'Itri : > On Sep 15, Lars Bahner wrote: > >> Prey tell, what is wrong with maintainers of for example iptables, >> providing a conffile >> with samples (which may even be commented out) which they can >> reference to in their documentation, where they comment on the >> different s

Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-15 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Sep 15, Lars Bahner wrote: > Prey tell, what is wrong with maintainers of for example iptables, > providing a conffile > with samples (which may even be commented out) which they can > reference to in their documentation, where they comment on the > different settings? That it duplicates the s

Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-15 Thread Lars Bahner
2009/9/15 Marco d'Itri : > On Sep 14, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: > >> LB> You could file this a a wishlist bug report against the iptables >> LB> package, and see if the  maintainer wish to add this file (or a larger >> LB> /etc/sysctl.d/iptables.conf with some sane defaults). > What makes you beli

Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-15 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Sep 14, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: > LB> You could file this a a wishlist bug report against the iptables > LB> package, and see if the maintainer wish to add this file (or a larger > LB> /etc/sysctl.d/iptables.conf with some sane defaults). What makes you believe that the kernel defaults are

Re: responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-14 Thread jidanni
retitle 526521 add /etc/sysctl.d/iptables.conntrack.accounting.conf severity 526521 wishlist thanks > "LB" == Lars Bahner writes: LB> You don't really need to file a bug. You need to add a file LB> /etc/sysctl.d/iptables.conntrack.accounting.conf LB> which should contain the line: LB> net

responsibility for iptables bug

2009-09-14 Thread jidanni
I need some help with http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=526521 I want to know the proper package to assign this bug to. All I know is we are supposed to use iptables recipies to protect our computers, and when I use # iptables -A b -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT in /