From: Michael Gale <michael.gale@utilitran.com>
To: Deepak Seshadri <dseshadri@broadbandmaritime.com>,
netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: iptables script file
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:14:19 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41810CCB.1040808@utilitran.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200410281351.i9SDpdoL058208@jkcpub.iserver.net>
Hello,
I am not to worried about speed as so much the administrative headache.
You should try breaking your rules up, for example I have done the
following:
rc.firewall
- loads standard / global options (ip_forward, sets up user chains,..)
- executes all other files.
We have a number of MAT addresses on our firewall - so each interface
has it's own file and each MAT address has it's own file as well.
Also each MAT address and interface have it's own user defined chain.
From my perspective this provides the best efficient for the firewall
because a packet gets passed to only 1 or 2 user chains and is only
compared with rules that need to be applied.
Also if some one is making changes to a MAT address and they accidently
break something, when they execute the file for updates to take affect
they are only affecting that user defined chain (unless they really
don't following the instructions). So the odds of affecting other
network traffic go down.
Michael.
Deepak Seshadri wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> Kenneth: Thank you very much for the reply. I'll look into this option.
>
> Does anybody have any other suggestion? How does everyone load their
> rule-set?
>
> My original mail:
> "So far I have been writing all the iptables commands in a file & ran it in
> a terminal (bash filename). Then I do the "service iptables save" to save &
> load the configuration during boot-up. Pretty soon the configuration file is
> going to have around 800 commands & this file is modified quite often. So
> for the changes to reflect in run-time I do a "bash <script-file>".
> Somewhere I read that loading that many commands using "bash <script-file>"
> is not recommended (Is this true?). So I started searching in Google for
> other alternatives. I came across the following:
>
> - Use rc.firewall (I don't know if its in /etc or /etc/init.d or what)
> - Use /etc/firewall.conf
> - Use /etc/init.d/firewall
>
> Could someone tell me which file to use? In Fedora core 2 I found only
> /etc/rc.d/init.d/iptables.
> Which way would be easy to load a huge script that would be modified quite
> often?
>
> OS specs:
> Fedora Core 2
> Kernel 2.6.8.1
> Iptables 1.2.11"
>
> Any help will be greatly appreciated.
> Thank you,
>
> Deepak Seshadri
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org [mailto:netfilter-
>>bounces@lists.netfilter.org] On Behalf Of Kenneth Porter
>>Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 5:29 PM
>>To: 'Netfilter Group'
>>Subject: Re: iptables script file
>>
>>
>>>Which way would be easy to load a huge script that would be modified
>>
>>quite
>>
>>>often?
>>
>>iptables-restore
>>
>>The save format is a little weird at first but it's not too hard to see
>>how
>>it matches your iptables commands. I now modify /etc/sysconfig/iptables
>>directly. (This is the save file used on Red Hat systems to reload the
>>firewall at boot time.)
>>
>>If I understand things correctly, iptables-restore makes a single kernel
>>call with only one lock, so it's very efficient at loading the tables into
>>the kernel.
>>
>>Change your script to write your rules into the save format and then
>>invoke
>>iptables-restore to load it. This is actually pretty simple, as most of
>>your iptables commands will be replaced with "echo ${RULEBODY} >
>>${SAVEFILE}" (where RULEBODY is the parameters to your old iptables
>>command).
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Michael Gale
Lan Administrator
Utilitran Corp.
The best part is when the people who know the least are the ones ranting
and raving.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-28 15:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-25 21:26 iptables script file Deepak Seshadri
2004-10-25 21:28 ` Kenneth Porter
2004-10-28 13:56 ` Deepak Seshadri
2004-10-28 15:05 ` Jason Opperisano
2004-10-30 21:00 ` Jose Maria Lopez
2004-11-03 17:14 ` Deepak Seshadri
2004-10-28 15:14 ` Michael Gale [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-31 1:52 Gary Smith
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=41810CCB.1040808@utilitran.com \
--to=michael.gale@utilitran.com \
--cc=dseshadri@broadbandmaritime.com \
--cc=netfilter@lists.netfilter.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.