[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1102031706010.28180@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 17:06:26 +0100 (CET)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
cc: Hans Schillstrom <hans.schillstrom@...csson.com>,
"kaber@...sh.net" <kaber@...sh.net>,
"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"hans@...illstrom.com" <hans@...illstrom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NETFILTER module xt_hmark new target for HASH MARK
On Thursday 2011-02-03 17:01, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>On 03/02/11 16:42, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>> On 03/02/11 15:23, Hans Schillstrom wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 14:51 +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>>>> On 03/02/11 14:34, Hans Schillstrom wrote:
>>>> this assumption is not valid in NAT handlings.
>>>
>>> That's true, because I want to avoid conntrack
>>>
>>>> If you want consistent hashing with NAT handlings you'll have to make
>>>> this stateful and use the conntrack source and reply directions of the
>>>> original tuples (thus making it stateful). That may be a problem because
>>>> some people may want to use this without enabling connection tracking.
>>>
>>> What about a compilation switch or a sysctl ?
>>
>> or better some option for iptables.
>
>Hm, this is actually not straight forward to implement, you'll have to
>use hook functions to avoid the module dependencies with conntrack and
>that's pretty annoying.
>
>I don't come up with a good solution for this.
If it loads conntrack always, there is the option to shovel it
into xt_connmark.c.
--
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