On 21 October 2015 at 07:50, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>> > I can then wait for that change to pop up in nf-next and just resend
>> > this series (which will then undo that change).
>>
>> I'd rather get things fixes for the existing code. This would also
>> allow simple p
Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > I can then wait for that change to pop up in nf-next and just resend
> > this series (which will then undo that change).
>
> I'd rather get things fixes for the existing code. This would also
> allow simple passing back to -stable, then we can move forward discuss
> a
From: Florian Westphal
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:14:21 +0200
> [ CC netdev since patch #2 isn't nf-specific. Dave, if you want
> I can resubmit that one after the next nf-pull request; let me know if
> you would prefer that ].
No objections to you merging patch #2 however you wish, it's
per
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:53:07PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Joe Stringer wrote:
> > > Good point. No, I don't. Any suggestions?
> > > I can try to just re-target -nf tree (sans patch #2). Pablo?
> >
> > The smallest change seems to be adding the nf_ct_frag6_consume_orig()
> > call to O
On 20 October 2015 at 13:53, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Feel free to submit this to -net, there is no dependency on any of the
> other changes.
OK, I'll follow up on that patch.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.o
Joe Stringer wrote:
> > Good point. No, I don't. Any suggestions?
> > I can try to just re-target -nf tree (sans patch #2). Pablo?
>
> The smallest change seems to be adding the nf_ct_frag6_consume_orig()
> call to OVS, plus the morph logic from patch 3. Alternatively if Pablo
> is fine with h
On 20 October 2015 at 01:17, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Joe Stringer wrote:
>> On 17 October 2015 at 13:14, Florian Westphal wrote:
>> > [ CC netdev since patch #2 isn't nf-specific. Dave, if you want
>> > I can resubmit that one after the next nf-pull request; let me know if
>> > you would
Joe Stringer wrote:
> On 17 October 2015 at 13:14, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > [ CC netdev since patch #2 isn't nf-specific. Dave, if you want
> > I can resubmit that one after the next nf-pull request; let me know if
> > you would prefer that ].
> >
> > Openvswitch seems broken wrt. to defr
On 17 October 2015 at 13:14, Florian Westphal wrote:
> [ CC netdev since patch #2 isn't nf-specific. Dave, if you want
> I can resubmit that one after the next nf-pull request; let me know if
> you would prefer that ].
>
> Openvswitch seems broken wrt. to defragmentation, it doesn't call
> nf
[ CC netdev since patch #2 isn't nf-specific. Dave, if you want
I can resubmit that one after the next nf-pull request; let me know if
you would prefer that ].
Openvswitch seems broken wrt. to defragmentation, it doesn't call
nf_ct_frag6_consume_orig to free the original fragments.
Moreover,
10 matches
Mail list logo
