From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Harald Welte Subject: Re: indev_name in bridge+iptables? Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 09:41:34 +0200 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <20030714074134.GA6538@naboo> References: <004801c345d8$8f9d9eb0$8101a8c0@dev> <20030712152759.5547.qmail@web13905.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb" Cc: Yong , netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org Return-path: To: Scott MacKay Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030712152759.5547.qmail@web13905.mail.yahoo.com> Errors-To: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 08:27:59AM -0700, Scott MacKay wrote: > Hi, I had the exact same thing. The physical name is > not passed up in the message, sucks huh? >=20 > What I resorted to was to alter the kernel code for > the QUEUE messages. The low level structure has the > physical device names in it, but are not passed up. I > altered it so if there was a physical device name for > in & out, it copied those values over the existing > indev and outdev names (since 'br0' is pretty > useless). There is only 1 file to change, but can't > remember it off the top of my head. The 'real' method > would be to alter the _msg structure to include the > physdev names in it, but I was lazy :P The reason for this dilemma is historical: - ip_queue was in the kernel first (since pre 2.4.0) - support for bridging firewalls was added later - real support for physdev matching in iptables is only available for kernel 2.5.x - changing the ipq_msg structure would render all previous versions of libipq (and existing ip_queue using applications) incompatible with new kernels Combined with the fact that bridging firewalls still seem very rare, we'd rather stick with compatibility instead of adding that feature... =2E.. however, a patch is always welcome and we'd put it into patch-o-matic 'experimental' or something. > -Scott --=20 - Harald Welte http://www.netfilter.org/ =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going on while IP was being designed." -- Paul Vixie --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/El6tXaXGVTD0i/8RAtA5AJ40qYWIyyVQSzoP/JC5FnSYoy8j8gCfcF2c ON3JZU/DL0ahv2yLF3nzT5g= =bIe/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb--