From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 14:28:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BB49155.3000902@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.01.1004011410250.17429@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Thursday 2010-04-01 13:56, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>>>>> just to defragment the packets in conntrack
>>>>>> immediately afterwards
>> This was supposed to read "one more *de*fragmentation pass. In
>> IPv6 we don't have to refragment, but simply output the original
>> fragments.
>>
>>> Assuming [nf-packet-flow.png] as a base, there are two
>>> spots in which conntrack/defrag happens: PREROUTING and OUTPUT.
>>> [...]
>>> We never see fragments in the ruleset
>>>
>>> a) for netif_rx received packets, defrag will be run early
>>> (yes, there's raw, but that's special anyway)
>>>
>>> b) locally-generated packets are fragmented only after all of
>>> Netfilter is done.
>> You're assuming conntrack is used.
>
> That was what your original message was about, was it not?
Partially, but the ruleset construction point you replied to of
course only applies when conntrack is not used.
> If there is no nf_defrag loaded, there is not much left besides
> the standard IPv4 stack defrag on input, the fragmentation
> on output, and the double-fragmentation on forward.
>
> What did I miss?
Now I seem to be missing something. Why are we suddenly talking
about IPv4 and nf_defrag?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-01 12:28 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
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 [this message]
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=4BB49155.3000902@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.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.