On 22 November 2016 at 13:35, Alexander Bluhm <alexander.bl...@gmx.net> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 10:47:34PM +0100, Mike Belopuhov wrote: >> On 21 November 2016 at 22:38, Alexandr Nedvedicky >> > The bluhm's change should not alter behavior of older code. >> Yes, it just adds something new. > > I did not try to add something new, I have preserved what was there > in pf_route(). I have moved the "if (!r->rt)" from pf_route() to > the "case PF_AFRT" in pf_test(). Now it is more obvious what is > happening and we ask ourselves "does it work?". I have not tested > it. >
Not exactly. You're now performing two output actions, while only one was done before. If r->rt was specified it was no longer a valid af-to usage.
