[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1259423157.3864.9.camel@bigi>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 10:45:57 -0500
From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To: KOVACS Krisztian <hidden@....bme.hu>
Cc: KOVACS Krisztian <hidden@...abit.hu>,
Andreas Schultz <aschultz@...p10.net>, tproxy@...ts.balabit.hu,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tproxy,regression] tproxy broken in 2.6.32
On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 16:15 +0100, KOVACS Krisztian wrote:
> It's already on prerouting, so that's not the problem.
ok.
> The problem is that for tproxy to work we've used to have a rule like
> this:
>
> # ip rule add fwmark 1 lookup 100
>
> plus a few iptables rules setting mark values.
>
> The issue is that previously fib_validate_source ignored the mark set on
> the skb, and thus when fib_validate_source() did a FIB lookup, it all went
> fine, because it found a result of type RTN_UNICAST.
Ok, that would be it ;->
> However, with your
> change, and because of the ip rule above not being specific enough now
> it's returning with type RTN_LOCAL, and that's considered invalid and thus
> the skb is dropped.
Well, since we are validating a source address - only unicast routes
are legitimate imo. i.e it was wrong to allow local before.
>
> The workaround is using more specific ip rules that include the ingress
> interface name:
>
> # ip rule add dev eth0 fwmark 1 lookup 100
>
Or adding routes into table 100 with type "unicast" would do it as
well.
cheers,
jamal
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists