Re: Possible IPTables bug in INPUT interface filtering?

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

 



On 21 April 2010 19:27, Narendra Choyal <narendrachoyal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> NOTE :
> -i also not work when we have two virtual IPs like eth0 and eth0:1 .
> In this case first rule will be applied whatever the interface is
> written i.e eth0 or eth0:1 .

Might be totally off base but have vague memories that the virtual
interface can't be filtered using -i / -o.

I've got a fairly complex rule setup using both in and out filters
using wildcards such that alot of rules are of the following kind
(these are for example only, exact port numbers and match criteria
vary)

-A INPUT -i eth+ -p udp -j ACCEPT
-A OUTPUT ! -o sl+ -p tcp -j DROP  (We don't want tcp traffic going
over very low bandwidth slip links!)
-A OUTPUT -o eth+ -p icmp -j ACCEPT
-A OUTPUT -o sl+ -p icmp <<hash limit match>> -j ACCEPT

Not encountered a problem where the io interface flag isn't working as
expected, but with the exception of one or two rules all the rules
using io flags are using wildcard matches.


-- 
Richard Horton
Users are like a virus: Each causing a thousand tiny crises until the
host finally dies.
http://www.pbase.com/arimus - My online photogallery
http://www.topcashback.co.uk/ref/rhorton
--
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