From: Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFD] iptables: mangle table obsoletes filter table
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 16:18:51 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200710121618.51046.a1426z@gawab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <470F6927.9040505@trash.net>
Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Al Boldi wrote:
> >>>The problem is that people think they are safe with the filter table,
> >>>when in fact they need the prerouting chain to seal things. Right now
> >>>this is only possible in the mangle table.
> >>
> >>Why do they need PREROUTING?
> >
> > Well, for example to stop any transient packets being forwarded. You
> > could probably hack around this using mark's, but you can't stop the
> > implied route lookup, unless you stop it in prerouting.
>
> This also works fine in FORWARD with a little extra overhead.
> If you really have to save resources, you should use PREROUTING/raw
> to also avoid the creation of a connection tracking entry.
Yes sure, if you use nat. But can you see how forcing people into splitting
their rules across tables adds complexity. And without ipt_REJECT patch,
they can't even use REJECT in prerouting, which forces them to do some
strange hacks.
IMHO, we should make things as easily configurable as possible, and as things
stand right now, the filter-table is completely useless for 99% of
use-cases.
Thanks!
--
Al
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-12 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-11 21:31 [RFD] iptables: mangle table obsoletes filter table Al Boldi
2007-10-12 4:35 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 4:39 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 5:37 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 11:48 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 12:25 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 12:31 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 13:18 ` Al Boldi [this message]
2007-10-12 13:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 22:56 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-17 22:37 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-17 23:24 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-20 3:40 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-20 4:47 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-10-20 11:10 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-21 4:31 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-21 4:53 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-10-23 22:27 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-12 13:01 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-12 13:30 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 13:39 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-12 13:48 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 14:02 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-12 14:03 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 22:56 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 23:02 ` Patrick McHardy
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-10-12 5:14 Al Boldi
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=200710121618.51046.a1426z@gawab.com \
--to=a1426z@gawab.com \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).