Re: No traction on default verdicts?

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

 



Arturo Borrero Gonzalez <arturo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/8/18 2:49 AM, Robert White wrote:
> > So like a year ago I mentioned that being able to put a default verdict
> > into a verdict map would be super helpful. Some interest was shown, but
> > it didn't happen.
> > 
> > Clearly it doesn't have any meaning for other kinds of sets where you
> > are matching a value as a truth-test, but for verdicts it's potentially
> > a big deal.
> > 
> > 
> > So something like this contrived example
> > 
> > ip protocol { tcp: jump tcp_tests,
> >               udp: jump udp_tests,
> >                 :: jump ip_sanitizer }
> > 
> 
> This has been in my backlog for a while. Sadly, I didn't find time to
> work on this and I'm not sure I will be able in the short term.

I think we should simply change the lookup expression to no longer
set NFT_BREAK when we don't find a match.

Then you can do:

ip protocol { tcp: jump tcp_tests,
              udp: jump udp_tests } jump ip_sanitizer

without any need for userspace changes.



[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