From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: kaber@trash.net, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:50:06 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BB47A5E.6090205@linux-ipv6.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1270031487-15094-2-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de>
Hello.
(2010/03/31 19:31), Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> Patrick McHardy notes: "We used to invoke IPv4 POST_ROUTING after
> fragmentation as well just to defragment the packets in conntrack
> immediately afterwards, but that got changed during the
> netfilter-ipsec integration. Ideally IPv6 would behave like IPv4."
>
> This patch makes it so. Sending an oversized frame (e.g. `ping6
> -s64000 -c1 ::1`) will now show up in POSTROUTING as a single skb
> rather than multiple ones.
I am not in favor doing this
because we theoretically make fragments __before__ routing
in output path (as we reassemble __after__ routing in input path).
IMHO, FORWARDING and POSTROUTING share similar semantics
from routing POV.
As we see "fragments" in FORWARDING, we should see
fragments in POST_ROUTING, at least in IPv6.
--yoshfuji
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-01 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-31 10:31 nf-next: TEE and nesting Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 1/5] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 10:50 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki [this message]
2010-04-01 10:57 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 11:17 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-01 11:50 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 11:56 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-01 12:13 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 12:28 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-01 22:48 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-07 13:24 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 2/5] net: ipv6: add IPSKB_REROUTED exclusion to NF_HOOK/POSTROUTING invocation Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 3/5] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt_TEE Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 4/5] netfilter: xtables2: make ip_tables reentrant Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 5/5] netfilter: xt_TEE: have cloned packet travel through Xtables too Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:33 ` nf-next: TEE and nesting Patrick McHardy
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-31 10:38 Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:38 ` [PATCH 1/5] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 10:23 ` 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=4BB47A5E.6090205@linux-ipv6.org \
--to=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--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.