Re: [PATCH nf-next 3/6] netfilter: nf_tables: disable old tracing if listener is present

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

 



On Wednesday 2015-11-25 16:06, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
>trace id 85898000 ip ip length 60 ip id 220 ip ttl 64 ip protocol tcp ip saddr 192.168.122.1 ip daddr 192.168.122.84 tcp sport 39558 tcp dport 10000 iif ens3 
>[...]
>The second part is the we output normal nft expressions, so "ip" is repeated
>for every header field. [...] the upside is that the expressions can be
>easily copy and pasted into the ruleset if necessary.

"ip ip" looks a bit of out of place. To illustrate,

	ip && ip.length==60 && ip.id==220 && ...

is what the rule seems to mean. However, it is also conceivable that
someone (who does not have the full knowledge as the .y parser does)
will read it as

	ip.ip.length==60 && ip.id==220 ...

and might wonder if that is some magic sauce to test the inside header of an
IPIP packet. Altogether, this causes the nft syntax to remain more confusing
than the classic iptables one where the &&-segmentation points are reasonably
known.


>trace id 85898200 arp filter input verdict 1 mark 0x00000001 iif ens3
>
>Comments welcome, especially regarding the current limitations we have.

I do not think that the far-right printing of IP addresses in the trace output
is a big deal. Even the iptables TRACE mechanism ends up showing the IP address
past column 80:

[239310.214731] TRACE: mangle:INPUT:policy:1 IN=wl0 OUT=
MAC=7c:7a:91:30:84:cd:18:83:bf:2d:7e:20:08:00 SRC=46.4.122.207
DST=192.168.217.18 LEN=88 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=56 ID=42841 DF PROTO=TCP
SPT=22 DPT=34572 SEQ=1941015595 ACK=2361189253 WINDOW=1382 RES=0x00 ACK PSH
URGP=0 OPT (0101080A0B6162F1038FDA1F) UID=25121 GID=100 

(add syslog timestamps in front for added effect).
And perhaps, to a particular reader, the L4 information - which is even
more right-shifted in both ipt and nft trace - may be more important
than the L3 part.

What I think is a doable way is to output the rule in evaluation order -
basically, the way it was input.
If the IP TTL is not that important, perhaps that expression should
have been moved "to the back" when the rule was generated by the
userspace tool before being entered into the kernel.
--
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