Le jeudi 18 février 2010 à 09:55 -0800, Afi Gjermund a écrit : > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Le jeudi 18 février 2010 à 09:40 -0800, Afi Gjermund a écrit : > >> I am still trying to figure out why the nf_conntrack_count differs > >> from the table system. I decided I would use the conntrack userspace > >> tools. > >> Both of my NICs are unplugged with no other userspace applications > >> running to affect connection tracking counts. > >> > >> > >> root@titan ~# date > >> Thu Feb 18 17:35:21 UTC 2010 > >> > >> root@titan ~# ./conntrack -C conntrack > >> 351 > >> > >> root@titan ~# date > >> Thu Feb 18 17:35:24 UTC 2010 > >> > >> root@titan ~# ./conntrack -F conntrack > >> conntrack v0.9.14 (conntrack-tools): connection tracking table has been emptied. > >> > >> root@titan ~# date > >> Thu Feb 18 17:35:31 UTC 2010 > >> > >> root@titan ~# ./conntrack -C conntrack > >> 351 > >> > >> root@titan ~# date > >> Thu Feb 18 17:35:36 UTC 2010 > >> > >> Shouldn't the value after the flush be 0? The traffic that has created > >> this mess is from a REDIRECT rule in the PREROUTING chain of the 'nat' > >> table. > > > > Could you post a copy of these rules ? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -s X.X.X.X -d X.X.X.X --sport X > --dport X -j REDIRECT --to-port X Yes I understood you were using such rules, but I cannot understand how it can trigger without real nics being plugged. So I asked you some details, apprently you dont want to provide them and prefer to hide from us :) -- 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
