On Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:18:04 -0500
"Christian Benvenuti (benve)" [off-list ref] wrote:

The patch description and the code are clearly saying that STP is
an exception, but I am just worried about the users.
Maybe a proper description in the iptables help is sufficient.

Users may otherwise try to use this new hook for STP too
(for example to generate logs or produce statistics/counters
or divert STP traffic to userspace, etc).

STP traffic already goes to userspace. And gets processed
by the LOCAL_IN chain. So I don't think it is needed.

Out of curiosity, ... if this gets accepted, shouldn't you provide
NF_BR_LINK_LOCAL_OUT too?
Or maybe you should call it NF_BR_LINK_LOCAL_FWD instead of
NF_BR_LINK_LOCAL_IN?

Thanks, that is a better name, I'll change it in next version.