From: Karl Gaissmaier <karl.gaissmaier@rz.uni-ulm.de>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LARTC] Q: best solution to stop traffic to huge amount of
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 20:44:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-103004914132491@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-lartc-103000210313805@msgid-missing>
Marian Jancar schrieb:
>
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:38:58 +0200
> "Karl Gaissmaier" <karl.gaissmaier@rz.uni-ulm.de> wrote:
>
> > I'm running a class B University network with approx 10k hosts
> > attached. I would now like to stop traffic from and to hosts
> > in my network not already registered in my DNS server.
> >
> > This means I've to handle with approx 50k rules|routes. Sure
> > I can summarize the unalloctaed address space a little bit
> > with masks to approx 30k rules, anyway this seems to be a problem.
>
> Create tree with decreasing netmask, you will have more rules in total
> but packets will have to travel through only few of them.
Yep, I thought already about this. If I set decreasing netmasks from /17
to /32 I would end up with 2^16 chains but after 16 comparisons
I would have a match. This would be the extreme!
If I create 256 different chains based on a /24 netmask
then I would have a match at least after 256 + 256 = 512
comparisons. The first max 256 comparisons select the
next chain and the last max 256 comparisons select the
/32 address in this special chain.
Anyway I find this ugly with iptables that we have no
MADDR match (in analogy to MPORT). If you build a firewall
you try always to build groups of services (mport) and
groups of servers/clients (maddr). With iptables you have
to reply the same rule n times for n similar servers/clients.
This is ugly and a performance bottleneck because these
similar rules are cheched sequentially.
Best regards and thanks for your tip.
Charly
--
Karl Gaissmaier Computing Center,University of Ulm,Germany
Email:karl.gaissmaier@rz.uni-ulm.de Network Administration
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-08-22 20:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-08-22 7:38 [LARTC] Q: best solution to stop traffic to huge amount of unregistered hosts Karl Gaissmaier
2002-08-22 20:44 ` Karl Gaissmaier [this message]
2002-08-22 20:55 ` [LARTC] Q: best solution to stop traffic to huge amount of Karl Gaissmaier
2002-08-22 21:04 ` Karl Gaissmaier
2002-09-03 11:13 ` Karl Gaissmaier
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=marc-lartc-103004914132491@msgid-missing \
--to=karl.gaissmaier@rz.uni-ulm.de \
--cc=lartc@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.