Re: [PATCH 05/19] netfilter: nf_conntrack_ipv6: improve fragmentation handling

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, 19 Aug 2012, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:

On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 14:26 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:

Could you provide an iptables command/rule, that trigger this code path?

The easiest way is a large ping with the NAT patches also applied,
in that case we also pass the first packet of a connection through
the stack reassembled.

So, a fragmented IPv6 ICMPv6 packet, I assume?

Correct.

Don't I need to load some of the helper modules, or just the
nf_conntrack_ipv6 module, or perhaps only nf_defrag_ipv6 ?

Not with the entire patchset, just IPv6 conntrack is enough. Aith IPv6 NAT
the first packet of a connection must always be defragemented, independant
of an assigned helper.

@@ -199,9 +200,13 @@ static unsigned int ipv6_confirm(unsigned int hooknum,
 static unsigned int __ipv6_conntrack_in(struct net *net,
 					unsigned int hooknum,
 					struct sk_buff *skb,
+					const struct net_device *in,
+					const struct net_device *out,
 					int (*okfn)(struct sk_buff *))
 {
 	struct sk_buff *reasm = skb->nfct_reasm;
+	struct nf_conn *ct;
+	enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;

 	/* This packet is fragmented and has reassembled packet. */
 	if (reasm) {
@@ -213,6 +218,20 @@ static unsigned int __ipv6_conntrack_in(struct net *net,
 			if (ret != NF_ACCEPT)
 				return ret;
 		}
+
+		/* Conntrack helpers need the entire reassembled packet in the
+		 * POST_ROUTING hook.
+		 */
+		ct = nf_ct_get(reasm, &ctinfo);
+		if (ct != NULL && test_bit(IPS_HELPER_BIT, &ct->status)) {
+			nf_conntrack_get_reasm(skb);
+			NF_HOOK_THRESH(NFPROTO_IPV6, hooknum, reasm,
+				       (struct net_device *)in,
+				       (struct net_device *)out,
+				       okfn, NF_IP6_PRI_CONNTRACK + 1);

Hook prio change to NF_IP6_PRI_CONNTRACK + 1

I didn't get this part, you want to change to PRE_CONNTRACK + 1? What
about raw and SELinux?

No - I don't want any changes.

I was just pointing out *where* the changes occur in your patch. This is
just a "service" to other email readers, so they can spot the changes
faster, I were referring to.

Could you send me your patch so I get a better picture of what you're doing exactly?
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux