From: "Yong" <sdssly@sina.com>
To: "Yong" <sdssly@sina.com>, "Harald Welte" <laforge@netfilter.org>
Cc: <netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
Subject: Re: ipq_set_verdict problem in bridge+iptables
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:24:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <003201c34a80$a9f57150$8501a8c0@dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 001c01c34a6f$97af4fe0$8501a8c0@dev
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yong" <sdssly@sina.com>
To: "Harald Welte" <laforge@netfilter.org>
Cc: <netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 9:22 AM
Subject: Re: ipq_set_verdict problem in bridge+iptables
> Hello Harald,
>
> Thank you for your emails!
>
> I want to use the iptable_queue in bridge+iptables environment. I can get the packet in userspace using -j QUEUE command. However, If I change the packet size. for example, I change the ping icmp packet size to 400, the packet Ethernet header is changed. In my test, the MAC address is changed to 0xffffffffff. I can capture this packet using sniffer tool. Since the MAC address is changed, the other computer cannot receive the ICMP packet.
>
> It seems that the bridge iptables patch changed something in the function ipq_set_verdict().
>
> Regarding the MTU issue, you are right. the ipq_set_verdict function does not perform the IP fragment. If I send a packet larger than MTU, it is missing. Is it by design?
>
> Can I modify the ipq_set_verdict function to perform the IP fragment? Is there any patch for this IP fragment issue?
>
> Thank you again for your help!
>
> Yong
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Harald Welte" <laforge@netfilter.org>
> To: "Yong Li" <sdssly@sina.com>
> Cc: <netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 4:07 PM
> Subject: Re: ipq_set_verdict problem in bridge+iptables
>
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 11:11:16AM +0800, Yong Li wrote:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I encountered a problem with the ipq_set_verdict function. I want to modify
> > the packet content and size using the ipq_set_verdict function. However, I
> > found I cannot change the IP packet size more than 400+ bytes. Is it a known
> > issue?
>
> what do you mean by 'I cannot' ? What happens? Is an error returned to
> the ipq_set_verdict() call? Is the packet silently discarded? Is the
> packet truncated?
>
> Anyway, it should work. But if you exceed the outgoing interface's MTU,
> I could imagine that no fragmentation happens...
>
> > Thanks in advance!
> > Yong
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-15 3:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20030712222620.28732.48265.Mailman@kashyyyk>
2003-07-13 3:11 ` ipq_set_verdict problem in bridge+iptables Yong Li
2003-07-14 8:07 ` Harald Welte
[not found] ` <001c01c34a6f$97af4fe0$8501a8c0@dev>
2003-07-15 3:24 ` Yong [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='003201c34a80$a9f57150$8501a8c0@dev' \
--to=sdssly@sina.com \
--cc=laforge@netfilter.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.