On Tue, 2006-10-17 at 11:41 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 08:26:26AM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > On 10/17/06, seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >Hey guys,
> > > I've been somewhat annoyed by the reports we've been getting. Is there
> > >a compelling reason why we need to have invalid connection attempts to
> > >proxy* logged? Why don't we just remove the -J LOG call and REJECT the
> > >connection normally?
> > >
> > >We're not going to DO anything about the connection so why not decrease
> > >the garbage that we see in the log reports?
> > >
> > >-sv
> > >
> >
> > Fine with me, Luke what do you think?
>
> Yeah, that noise definitely needs to stop. I'll poke around at the
> pyroman configs config later tonight and see if I can stop that.
>
> For future reference, all of our firewall configurations are in
> 'fedora-config/files/DEFAULT/etc/pyroman', and the logging in particular
> is 04_log.py. So feel free to fix up any problems that you see.
>
> This is the chain that is causing the ruckus:
>
> ## Log dropped packets in a nicer format
> add_chain("USR_drop")
> for state in ("NEW", "ESTABLISHED", "RELATED", "INVALID", "SNAT", "DNAT"):
> iptables("USR_drop", "-m conntrack --ctstate %s -m limit --limit %s --limit-burst %s -j LOG --log-prefix \"CONN=%s \"" % (state, LOGLIMIT, LOGLIMITBURST, state))
> iptables("USR_drop", "-j DROP")
>
> I guess the question is, what *do* we want to log?
Do we care? If the packet is being dropped does it matter if we know
about it?
If we have a problem with a service breaking then we can turn on the
logging and track it down - but if things are working why not just leave
it off?
-sv
