* Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8325] New: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen [not found] <200704132053.l3DKrC9X000466@fire-2.osdl.org> @ 2007-04-13 21:47 ` Andrew Morton 2007-04-16 5:12 ` Patrick McHardy 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2007-04-13 21:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netdev; +Cc: bugme-daemon@kernel-bugs.osdl.org, wijata On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 13:53:12 -0700 bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8325 > > Summary: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen > Kernel Version: 2.6.19-1.2911.fc6PAE 2.6.19-gentoo-r4 > Status: NEW > Severity: normal > Owner: networking_netfilter-iptables@kernel-bugs.osdl.org > Submitter: wijata@nec-labs.com > > > Most recent kernel where this bug did *NOT* occur: > Distribution: FC6, gentoo > Hardware Environment: > Software Environment: > Problem Description: > > Steps to reproduce: > Try redirecting to range of ports with iptables, kernel(?) will always redirect > to first port from given range. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8325] New: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen 2007-04-13 21:47 ` [Bugme-new] [Bug 8325] New: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen Andrew Morton @ 2007-04-16 5:12 ` Patrick McHardy 2007-04-16 5:26 ` Denys 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Patrick McHardy @ 2007-04-16 5:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: wijata; +Cc: Andrew Morton, netdev, bugme-daemon@kernel-bugs.osdl.org Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 13:53:12 -0700 > bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > > >>http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8325 >> >> Summary: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen >> Kernel Version: 2.6.19-1.2911.fc6PAE 2.6.19-gentoo-r4 >> Status: NEW >> Severity: normal >> Owner: networking_netfilter-iptables@kernel-bugs.osdl.org >> Submitter: wijata@nec-labs.com >> >> >>Most recent kernel where this bug did *NOT* occur: >>Distribution: FC6, gentoo >>Hardware Environment: >>Software Environment: >>Problem Description: >> >>Steps to reproduce: >>Try redirecting to range of ports with iptables, kernel(?) will always redirect >>to first port from given range. It will use a different port if there is a clash (a connection with the same identity already exists). I'm guessing you're expecting that it will use the ports in order. We might be able to change that, but I don't really see a case where it would make sense. Please describe what you're trying to do. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8325] New: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen 2007-04-16 5:12 ` Patrick McHardy @ 2007-04-16 5:26 ` Denys 2007-04-16 5:30 ` Patrick McHardy 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Denys @ 2007-04-16 5:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick McHardy, wijata Cc: Andrew Morton, netdev, bugme-daemon@kernel-bugs.osdl.org Sorry, i will put my IMHO, since i am using it too. I guess it can be useful for load-balancing scenario. Is there way to provide both ways? Thinking... 60% done, But maybe this can be done over -m statistic already On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 07:12:33 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote > Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 13:53:12 -0700 > > bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > > > > > >>http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8325 > >> > >> Summary: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen > >> Kernel Version: 2.6.19-1.2911.fc6PAE 2.6.19-gentoo-r4 > >> Status: NEW > >> Severity: normal > >> Owner: networking_netfilter-iptables@kernel-bugs.osdl.org > >> Submitter: wijata@nec-labs.com > >> > >> > >>Most recent kernel where this bug did *NOT* occur: > >>Distribution: FC6, gentoo > >>Hardware Environment: > >>Software Environment: > >>Problem Description: > >> > >>Steps to reproduce: > >>Try redirecting to range of ports with iptables, kernel(?) will always redirect > >>to first port from given range. > > It will use a different port if there is a clash (a connection with the > same identity already exists). I'm guessing you're expecting that it > will use the ports in order. We might be able to change that, but I > don't really see a case where it would make sense. Please describe what > you're trying to do. > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Denys Fedoryshchenko Technical Manager Virtual ISP S.A.L. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8325] New: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen 2007-04-16 5:26 ` Denys @ 2007-04-16 5:30 ` Patrick McHardy 2007-04-16 5:45 ` Denys 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Patrick McHardy @ 2007-04-16 5:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Denys; +Cc: wijata, Andrew Morton, netdev, bugme-daemon@kernel-bugs.osdl.org Denys wrote: > Sorry, i will put my IMHO, since i am using it too. > > I guess it can be useful for load-balancing scenario. That makes sense with using multiple IPs (and we support doing that), but whats the point of load-balancing to differenet *ports*? > Is there way to provide both ways? > Thinking... 60% done, But maybe this can be done over -m statistic already 2.6.21-rc supports randomized port selection (with iptables userspace from SVN). Using the statistic match would work as well. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8325] New: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen 2007-04-16 5:30 ` Patrick McHardy @ 2007-04-16 5:45 ` Denys 2007-04-16 5:52 ` Patrick McHardy 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Denys @ 2007-04-16 5:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick McHardy Cc: wijata, Andrew Morton, netdev, bugme-daemon@kernel-bugs.osdl.org On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 07:30:33 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote > Denys wrote: > > Sorry, i will put my IMHO, since i am using it too. > > > > I guess it can be useful for load-balancing scenario. > > That makes sense with using multiple IPs (and we support doing that), > but whats the point of load-balancing to differenet *ports*? Easy - for example i have my own TCP acceleration solution, which is using REDIRECT, then getsockopt/SO_ORIGINAL_DST to get original IP, then forwarding to compressed tunnel, stripping unneeded bytes (oh, my expensive satellite bandwidth). This way for example i can do some kind load-balancing for satellite bandwidth. But i have done it over -m statistic. > > > Is there way to provide both ways? > > Thinking... 60% done, But maybe this can be done over -m statistic already > > 2.6.21-rc supports randomized port selection (with iptables userspace > from SVN). Using the statistic match would work as well. > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Denys Fedoryshchenko Technical Manager Virtual ISP S.A.L. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8325] New: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen 2007-04-16 5:45 ` Denys @ 2007-04-16 5:52 ` Patrick McHardy 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Patrick McHardy @ 2007-04-16 5:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Denys; +Cc: wijata, Andrew Morton, netdev, bugme-daemon@kernel-bugs.osdl.org Denys wrote: > On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 07:30:33 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote > >>That makes sense with using multiple IPs (and we support doing that), >>but whats the point of load-balancing to differenet *ports*? > > > Easy - for example i have my own TCP acceleration solution, which is using > REDIRECT, then getsockopt/SO_ORIGINAL_DST to get original IP, then forwarding > to compressed tunnel, stripping unneeded bytes (oh, my expensive satellite > bandwidth). This way for example i can do some kind load-balancing for > satellite bandwidth. That sounds rather hackish, you might as well do it in your application. I just noticed we don't accept the random option for DNAT/REDIRECT yet, but that is easily fixed (I'll queue a patch for 2.6.22). Then this will work and select ports from the range randomly: iptables -t nat -A INPUT .. -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000:1010 --random ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-04-16 5:54 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <200704132053.l3DKrC9X000466@fire-2.osdl.org>
2007-04-13 21:47 ` [Bugme-new] [Bug 8325] New: -j REDIRECT --to-ports 1000-1009, always first choosen Andrew Morton
2007-04-16 5:12 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-04-16 5:26 ` Denys
2007-04-16 5:30 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-04-16 5:45 ` Denys
2007-04-16 5:52 ` Patrick McHardy
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).