Re: iptables NEW TABLE request. WAS[Re: Catching un-DNAT'ed packets]

["Покотиленко Костик" <casper@meteor.dp.ua>]

В Птн, 26/01/2007 в 17:12 +0100, Jan Engelhardt пишет:
> >В Птн, 26/01/2007 в 12:24 +0100, Jan Engelhardt пишет:
> >> >http://www.meteor.dp.ua/casper/firewill.pdf
> >> >
> >> >how would I make a "feature request" to ask for, say, "mangle2" table
> >> >that is just after "nat" in POSTROUTING? The only reason for this move
> >> >is the need for ability to catch un-DNAT'ed packets with -j ULOG or
> >> >(better) to -j QUEUE.
> >> 
> >> And  -t nat -A POSTROUTING -m conntrack ! --ctstate DNAT
> >> as a last rule won't do?
> >
> >This will (probably) catch packets that hasn't been DNAT'ed.
> >BUT, the thing I need it to catch replay packets that has already passed
> >"un-DNAT" procedure.
> 
> Ah, now I get what you mean with un-DNAT. (Unwrapping I'd say ;-)
> Too bad, I don't see a way. But as an intermediate workaround, you could
> copy ULOG/QUEUE to a new module, say, MYULOG/MYQUEUE and modify it so as to
> display the original address pair (which should easily be possible with kernel
> code).

That requires kernel hacking practice which I don't have. Also I won't
do that, because this is for *production use*, so I would relay on
someone experienced.

Also, considering that the need I have is not so specific and it is
highly probable that it will be usefull for many others I would rather
prefer to make a "feature request" for that extra table (ala "mangle2")
to be implemented by professional team of kernel developers.

And, is it possible to get a verdict about this request here? Or maybe
there is more suitable place to ask?

Thanks for quick answer.
-- 
Покотиленко Костик <casper@meteor.dp.ua>