Re: Site-specific filter rules problem

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

 



On 05/29/08 00:02, Mark Baker wrote:
Thanks for the advice, Grant. Keeping in mind that I'm only having this problem with one site and therefore it must be doing something differently, I did a little more playing and found out I could eliminate the problem by adding the following rule after my state rule, like this:

You are welcome.  I'm glad that you got things working.

<snip>

After adding the next 2nd and 3rd rules above, I found that huge numbers of packets were getting past my state rule, but it cured the problem. When I compare the logged packets to /proc/net/nf_conntrack, though, I find that the sockets identified in the missed packets matched established connections listed in nf_conntrack, so I'm still not sure why they were being missed.

It might be worth submitting a new post to the mailing list (new thread rather than a reply to this one) clearly stating what you were seeing in your conntrack tables. Also, include as many relevant logs and conntrack entries as possible. You may want to consider sniffing some traffic and including that as well.



Grant. . . .
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Netfilter Development]     [Linux Kernel Networking Development]     [Netem]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Advanced Routing & Traffice Control]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux