similar to: [Bug 756] iptables: Memory allocation problem.

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=756 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WORKSFORME --- Comment #3 from Phil Oester

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=689 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Summary|Ruleset counter on -m |Ordering of multiple

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|jengelh at medozas.de |netfilter-buglog at lists.netf | |ilter.org -- Configure

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=536 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=773 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|jengelh at medozas.de |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=758 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=790 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com --- Comment #4 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-06-20

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=679 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=599 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WORKSFORME --- Comment #5 from Phil Oester

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580 --- Comment #5 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-06-24 20:07:02 CEST --- Unclear how you can say with certainty that this is impossible, but let's ignore that point for the moment. Is there some reason that iptables-save should do the sorting for userspace scripts? Another alternative would be to always load the

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580 --- Comment #7 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-06-24 23:34:51 CEST --- > would you be thrilled if all the rules were in random order too? This comparison is a bit far fetched, given that ordering of rules is so important (accept before drop, etc). The order in which tables are output in iptables-save is largely

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sworddragon2 at aol.com --- Comment #7 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-05-20 22:35:01

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=616 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #10 from Phil Oester

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com --- Comment #3 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-05-24

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=616 --- Comment #8 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-07-09 15:56:45 CEST --- (In reply to comment #7) > It is the duty of the software to properly execute that policy. Here, the > software fails to do so because it produces duplicate redundant rules which are > never used. And where is it documented that the software

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=777 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=745 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=662 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|