[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.01.1004011511180.1174@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 15:15:38 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
cc: netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] netfilter: xt_TEE: have cloned packet travel through
Xtables too
On Thursday 2010-04-01 13:09, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Conntrack loops are prevented by using a dummy conntrack, just as
>> NOTRACK does.
>[...]
>> - When the cloned packets gets XFRMed or tunneled, its status switches
>> from "special" to "plain". Doing policy routing on them does not seem
>> so far-fetched.
>
>My question was about the case without conntrack.
Hm. Do you have any suggestion in countering a case whereby a user
does -I OUTPUT -j TEE without conntrack?
Perhaps making nesting a feature that requires conntrack, such that the
non-CT case can't loop?
>> I can think of a handful of applications:
>> - CLASSIFY
>
>Good point, you should probably reset a couple of skb members
>after the skb_copy().
I take it you mean
nf_reset(skb)
skb->mark = 0;
skb_init_secmark(nskb);
Or should we be using skb_alloc and copying the data portion over, like
ipt_REJECT does since v2.6.24-2931-g9ba99b0?
--
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