From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kiran Kumar Immidi Subject: Re: connection tracking without iptables? Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:46:21 +0530 Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <200410151046.21604.immidi@spymac.com> References: <7C9884991ADAE0479C14F10C858BCDF591E37C@alderaan.smgtec.com> <561dc326041014113163a6a9eb@mail.gmail.com> <20041014185758.GA4057@bender.817west.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20041014185758.GA4057@bender.817west.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Jason Opperisano , netfilter@lists.netfilter.org On Friday 15 October 2004 00:27, Jason Opperisano wrote: > i'm not aware of any way that reading /proc/net/ip_conntrack would > prevent the system from creating new conntrack entries, but there's lots > of things that i'm not aware of... AFAIR, the proc interface for the ip conntrack contents was considered broken and was moved to use the seq_file interface. The patch to this effect went into 2.6.9-rc1. http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter-devel/2004-July/016149.html I am not sure, but may be this patch could help you. -- Regards, Kiran Kumar Immidi