[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131106143349.GF15370@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 15:33:49 +0100
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, pablo@...filter.org,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu, mleitner@...hat.com,
kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org, wensong@...ux-vs.org,
horms@...ge.net.au, ja@....bg, edumazet@...gle.com,
pshelar@...ira.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, coreteam@...filter.org
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 2/3] netfilter: ip6_tables: use reasm skb for
matching
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
> >> >So if someone wants to change this, simply *only* pass the reassembled
> >> >packet through the netfilter hooks and drop the fragments, as in IPv4.
> >>
> >> This is unfortunatelly not possible because in forwarding use case, the
> >> fragments have to be send out as they come in.
> >
> >No, the IPv6 NAT patches fixed that, we still do proper refragmentation
> >and we still respect the original fragment sizes, thus are not responsible
> >for potentially exceeding the PMTU on the following path.
>
> Can you please point where this is done. Where the original fragment
> sizes are stored and in which code are they restored? Thanks.
Patrick is probably talking about
commit 4cdd34084d539c758d00c5dc7bf95db2e4f2bc70
(netfilter: nf_conntrack_ipv6: improve fragmentation handling)
which introduces 'frag_max_size' in inet6_skb_parm struct.
--
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