On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 04:16:19 +0100 (CET)
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Friday 2009-02-27 02:52, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >+static bool strict_mt(const struct sk_buff *skb, const struct xt_match_param *par)
> >+{
> >+ struct in_device *in_dev;
> >+ bool ret;
> >+
> >+ rcu_read_lock();
> >+ in_dev = __in_dev_get_rcu(skb->dev);
> >+ ret = (in_dev && inet_addr_onlink(in_dev, ip_hdr(skb)->daddr, 0));
> >+ rcu_read_unlock();
> >+
> >+ return ret;
> >+}
>
> This looks easy enough to also do for IPv6. Would you?
IPV6 already does this.
>
> >+static struct xt_match strict_mt_reg __read_mostly = {
> >+ .name = "strict",
> >+ .family = NFPROTO_IPV4,
> >+ .match = strict_mt,
> >+ .matchsize = 0,
> >+ .me = THIS_MODULE,
> >+};
>
> The match seems to make the most sense where an input device
> is available, so
>
> .hooks = (1 << NF_INET_PRE_ROUTING) | (1 << NF_INET_LOCAL_IN) |
> (1 << NF_INET_FORWARD)
>
> should probably be added.
Then routing wouldn't work...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
