From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
To: Jordan Glover <Golden_Miller83@protonmail.ch>
Cc: "jwollrath@web.de" <jwollrath@web.de>,
"wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com" <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wg-quick: linux: add support for nft and prefer it
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 20:15:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHmME9qbpPQ2-M66bjjV32t2rvbsd=-EgEJau5SfxHoe6UEixg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OP549CYtruXJJQ-jftan-7-ySlaBW7egOMSgpfkcSjBM3DMK6rnDyiN-V8VUEdIq-MxP5iNwV57VMvcPp9MwTjdUIndoZ3JtQXlW900KhW8=@protonmail.ch>
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 7:58 PM Jordan Glover
<Golden_Miller83@protonmail.ch> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, December 10, 2019 5:36 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On the other hand, if what you say is actually true in our case, and
> > nftables is utter crap, then perhaps we should scrap this nft(8) patch
> > all together and just keep pure iptables(8). DKG - you seemed to want
> > nft(8) support, though. How would you feel about that sort of
> > conclusion?
> >
> > Jason
>
> The only scenario where you really want to use nft is where iptables command
> doesn't exist. I don't know how realistic scenario it is but I assume it can
> happen in the wild. Otherwise calling iptables will take care of both iptables
> and nftables automatically if those are supported on system. That's why I
> proposed to invert current patch logic.
I reason about things a bit differently. For me, the decision is
between these two categories:
A) iptables-nft points to iptables and is available for people who
want a nft-only system. So, code against the iptables API, and mandate
that users either have iptables or iptables-nft installed, which isn't
unreasonable, considering the easy availability of each.
B) nft is the future and should be used whenever available. Support
iptables as a fallback though for old systems, and remove it as soon
as we can.
Attitudes that fall somewhere between (A) and (B) are much less
interesting to me.
_______________________________________________
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-10 19:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-10 15:48 Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 16:52 ` Jordan Glover
2019-12-10 16:54 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 17:05 ` Jordan Glover
2019-12-10 17:11 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 17:12 ` Roman Mamedov
2019-12-10 17:28 ` Davide Depau
2019-12-10 17:33 ` Matthias Urlichs
2019-12-10 17:36 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 18:00 ` Roman Mamedov
2019-12-10 18:58 ` Jordan Glover
2019-12-10 19:15 ` Jason A. Donenfeld [this message]
2019-12-10 20:30 ` Jordan Glover
2019-12-10 20:34 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 21:56 ` Vasili Pupkin
2019-12-10 22:09 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 22:27 ` Vasili Pupkin
2019-12-12 11:21 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 17:31 ` Vasili Pupkin
2019-12-10 17:38 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAHmME9qbpPQ2-M66bjjV32t2rvbsd=-EgEJau5SfxHoe6UEixg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=Golden_Miller83@protonmail.ch \
--cc=jwollrath@web.de \
--cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).