From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Oester Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix NAT TCP sequence adjustment Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 11:25:05 -0700 Message-ID: <20050420182505.GA7612@linuxace.com> References: <4250FA72.3020502@trash.net> <20050404204716.GA4067@linuxace.com> <20050406044806.GA9711@linuxace.com> <4263108E.1030707@trash.net> <20050419005847.GA591@linuxace.com> <42666F4C.5080706@trash.net> <20050420155308.GA7057@linuxace.com> <42667E51.3060005@trash.net> <20050420172406.GB7057@linuxace.com> <42669674.3020905@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Harald Welte , Rusty Russell , netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org Return-path: To: Patrick McHardy Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42669674.3020905@trash.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 07:50:44PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >I'm aware of that, but again I claim that it is irrelevant in this case > >because the PORT commands will not be processed out of order (even if the > >data packets are), and thus the adjustments will occur sequentially. > > Why wouldn't they be processed out of order by nat? Because a second transfer will not be started until the first completes in my experience. Thus, there will not be two 'PORT' packets floating around to potentially arrive out of order > I agree that the problem should be fixed ASAP. I'll do a proper fix > now - either by moving seq adjustment after NAT helpers or by adding > a flag to the skb. Doesn't sound like a -stable fix, but whatever you think is best. Phil