From: Tobias Klausmann <klausman@schwarzvogel.de>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Netfilter Development Mailinglist <netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Possible race condition in conntracking
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:28:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090127132810.GA21498@eric.schwarzvogel.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <497F08C4.90705@trash.net>
Hi!
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Tobias Klausmann wrote:
>> So, as far as rule-matching is concerned, the two packets are
>> handled identically. Whatever happens after this:
>> Jan 27 11:00:39 fw2 kernel: TRACE: nat:POSTROUTING:policy:3 IN=
>> OUT=eth2.188 SRC=194.97.7.116 DST=194.97.3.83 LEN=66 TOS=0x00
>> PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=46964 DF PROTO=UDP SPT=53452 DPT=53 LEN=46 is making
>> this very packet go away. The policy of nat/PR is
>> ACCEPT.
>
> This just means it passed through the last table/chain. The
> only one following is conntrack confirmation.
>
> Damn it :) I just noticed, we do indeed drop packets from
> duplicate new connections in conntrack confirmation.
So the question remains what to do instead and how to do it. That
probably is deep Netfilter mojo, so I could only speculate wildly.
> You should see the insert_failed conntrack counter show this
> (/proc/net/stat/nf_conntrack).
We do, as I said in my first mail. Near as I can tell,
nf_conntrack_confirm() is the only function that ever increases
that counter, so it's definitely dropped there. As to how one
could handle it differently, I have to defer to people with more
Netfilter expertise. No point in "fixing" this by breaking other
stuff.
Regards,
Tobias
--
printk("Cool stuff's happening!\n")
linux-2.4.3/fs/jffs/intrep.c
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-27 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-27 7:57 Possible race condition in conntracking Tobias Klausmann
2009-01-27 9:20 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-27 13:06 ` Tobias Klausmann
2009-01-27 13:14 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-27 13:28 ` Tobias Klausmann [this message]
2009-01-27 13:48 ` Patrick McHardy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090127132810.GA21498@eric.schwarzvogel.de \
--to=klausman@schwarzvogel.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.