On 4/22/13 4:31 PM, "Dash Four" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>>     To allow a nfobject to be incremented unconditionally, you may
>>     follow the closing parenthesis with '!' (e.g., NFACCT(all)!). When
>>     '!' is omitted, the object is incremented only if all of the rule's
>>     matches succeed.
>>
>>     "!" is useful in the following rule:
>>
>>      NFACCT(all)     -       +fooset[src]    +barset[dst](foobar)
>>
>>     In this rule, the 'all' nfacc counter is incremented
>>     unconditionally while the foobar counter is only incremented if
>>     the packet SOURCE address is in fooset and the DEST address is in
>>     barset.
>>   
>I have been wrecking my head to see whether "!" makes any sense in
>nfacct objects used in ipsets (i.e. "(foobar)!" in your example above)
>and can't think of any - the set match order is always the same
>regardless of whether I use "!" or not. In your example above it doesn't
>make any difference whether I use "(foobar)" or "(foobar)!" - the end
>result is exactly the same.

Of course. In a SOURCE or DEST list, ! (without a preceding '.') signals
exclusion. So you have an empty exclusion list when you add '!'. I had no
intention of supporting the '!' any other way in the SOURCE and DEST
columns.

-Tom
You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to
skydive twice.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced
analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building
apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use
our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account!
http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to