netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Kernel Netdev Mailing List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Netfilter Development Mailinglist
	<netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>,
	Harald Welte <laforge@gnumonks.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10]: [NETFILTER]: Defer fragmentation in ip_output when connection tracking is used
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 03:28:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <437BEAC8.40904@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051115104425.GA31719@gondor.apana.org.au>

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 03:19:17AM +0000, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> 
>>[NETFILTER]: Defer fragmentation in ip_output when connection tracking is used
>>
>>This allows to get rid of the okfn use in ip_refrag and save the useless
>>fragmentation/defragmentation step when NAT is used.
> 
 >
> I'm slightly uneasy about this change because for POST_ROUTING, the
> defragmentation occurs in the middle of the hook, NF_IP_PRI_NAT_SRC.
> 
> This means that things like the mangle table currently sees the
> fragments as opposed to the whole packet.  This patch will change
> that.
> 
> Now I'm not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing.  In fact,
> for all I know it might make more sense to do this.  But we should
> consider the possible implications before embarking on it.

Good point. I would also prefer to have fragmentation occur after
POST_ROUTING in all cases. Looking at the in-tree targets, it means
loosing the ability to do a couple of things:

- CLASSIFY fragments differently
- MARK fragments differently
- DSCP/ECN/TOS mark fragments differently
- Change TTLs of fragments to differently values

None of them seems very important. The DSCP and ECN targets were
broken until not long ago without anyone noticing, the TTL target is
relatively new. So it comes down to loosing the ability to classify
fragments of one packet differently using iptables, which doesn't
make much sense too me. In fact I think it would make classification
easier if mangle would see the whole packet.

I've CCed Harald for his opinion in case I missed something.

Regards
Patrick

  reply	other threads:[~2005-11-17  2:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-11-11  3:19 [PATCH 02/10]: [NETFILTER]: Defer fragmentation in ip_output when connection tracking is used Patrick McHardy
2005-11-15 10:44 ` Herbert Xu
2005-11-17  2:28   ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2005-11-19  7:02     ` Patrick McHardy
2005-11-22  7:59     ` Harald Welte
2005-11-22  8:17       ` Patrick McHardy
2005-11-22 14:19         ` Harald Welte

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=437BEAC8.40904@trash.net \
    --to=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=laforge@gnumonks.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.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).