From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: masquerading failure for at least icmp and tcp+sack on amd64 Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:59:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20050913.135954.111731835.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20050911131943.GC9865@schmorp.de> <43243AB9.9000705@trash.net> <20050913110902.0ad58b90@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: akpm@osdl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, kaber@trash.net, schmorp@schmorp.de Return-path: To: shemminger@osdl.org In-Reply-To: <20050913110902.0ad58b90@localhost.localdomain> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Stephen Hemminger Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:09:02 -0700 > Also, on the input path for TCP and UDP, the code does not > depend on the hardware being correct, and if the checksum > is incorrect, it just prints a warning and does a software > checksum before deciding to drop. > Perhaps netfilter code needs to handle that case? I personally think netfilter should do so.