Re: MARK-Operations problems

[Alexander Samad <alex@samad.com.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1231 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 08:57:51AM +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Alexander Samad wrote:
> 
> > Double checked this and I am pretty sure its pacthed all the right
> > modules are there (the ones that are created with the patch), the
> > strange bit is even a working command -j MARK --set-mark 0x01 fails with
> > the same error, but the unpatched iptables doesn't on the same patches
> > kernel
> 
> The fact that the unpatched iptables works is a quite clear indication 
> that the running kernel is not patched, at least not with the MARK 
> operations patch.
> 
> When iptables is built it is using the same headers as the kernel. If the 
> headers used when building iptables is different from those used when 
> building the running kernel then operations on matches/extensions will 
> fail with size errors.
Okay will rebuild and retest!

> 
> Another occation when such errors can happen is in special cases on 64-bit
> machines with split personality, with kernel running in 64-bits and
> userspace in 32-bits. This is maybe seen on SPARC-64 and Opteron I think,
> but is not very likely to be the cause of errors with the MARK operation.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Henrik
> 
> 

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]