From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272666AbTG1FfK (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 01:35:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272670AbTG1FfK (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 01:35:10 -0400 Received: from louise.pinerecords.com ([213.168.176.16]:23776 "EHLO louise.pinerecords.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272666AbTG1FfG (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 01:35:06 -0400 Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 07:50:15 +0200 From: Tomas Szepe To: "David S. Miller" Cc: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [TRIVIAL] place IPv4 netfilter submenu where it belongs Message-ID: <20030728055015.GA32673@louise.pinerecords.com> References: <20030726200646.GF16160@louise.pinerecords.com> <20030727160942.647707d8.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030727160942.647707d8.davem@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > [davem@redhat.com] > > On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 22:06:46 +0200 > Tomas Szepe wrote: > > > $subj > > > > Patch against -bk3. > > This doesn't look right at all. > > Netfilter is for many protocols other than ipv4 (ipv6, bridging, > decnet, etc.) so putting it under ipv4 makes not much sense > to me. You're right, I'll think about this some more. -- Tomas Szepe