netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Davide Caratti <dcaratti@redhat.com>
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
	Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu>,
	fw@strlen.de, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
	coreteam@netfilter.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH nf-next 0/2] netfilter: autoload NAT support for non-builtin L4 protocols
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:12:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1476781962.2878.31.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161017175827.GA21172@salvia>

hello Pablo,

On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 19:58 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> I would really like to see DCCP, SCTP and UDPlite built-in, just like
> other protocol trackers (TCP, UDP...). This may require a bit of
> review work on your/our side, but it would greatly appreciated.

thank you for looking at this. At the moment, I'm testing a v2 of this
patch extending to REDIRECT targets _ which are exposing the same issue as
SNAT and DNAT, and using existing NFTA_RULE_COMPAT_PROTO attribute to
carry the transport protocol number in case a SNAT/DNAT/REDIRECT target is
specified in a nftables statement.

> Many vendors rely on default configurations, not even looking into
> modprobing things, so these protocols are hopeless in the current
> situation since routers running Netfilter will likely not supported
> them. This is worse since nf_conntrack drops packets for protocols
> like SCTP and DCCP since the generic protocol can no longer be used.

true, unless user modprobes nf_conntrack_proto_{dccp,udplite,sctp}, any
SNAT/DNAT/REDIRECT rule will not be hit by traffic.

> Once these protocols are supported built-in, users can configure from
> our control plane, ie. iptables/nft, if they explicitly don't want to
> allow them by dropping protocols of this kind. But in that case we
> would not be responsible anymore for the current situation at least.
> 
> Moreover, following this approach, we would also avoid the new
> attribute in nft_nat to indicate the layer 4 protocol that you have
> mentioned already.

Ok - so do you think it's better to have
nf_nat_proto_{dccp,sctp,udplite}.o built into nf_nat.ko and
nf_conntrack_proto_{dccp,sctp,udplite}.o, and maybe also
nf_conntrack_proto_gre.o, built into nf_conntrack.ko? 

thank you in advance,
regards
--
davide


  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-18  9:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-06 17:09 [PATCH nf-next 0/2] netfilter: autoload NAT support for non-builtin L4 protocols Davide Caratti
2016-10-06 17:09 ` [PATCH nf-next 1/2] netfilter: persistent aliases for l4 nat protocols Davide Caratti
2016-10-06 17:09 ` [PATCH nf-next 2/2] xt_nat: probe module for non-builtin L4 protocols Davide Caratti
2016-10-07  7:35 ` [PATCH nf-next 0/2] netfilter: autoload NAT support " Arturo Borrero Gonzalez
2016-10-07  9:59   ` Davide Caratti
2016-10-07 10:32     ` Arturo Borrero Gonzalez
2016-10-07 14:20       ` Florian Westphal
2016-10-17 17:58 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2016-10-18  9:12   ` Davide Caratti [this message]
2016-10-19 12:23     ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2016-10-19 12:57       ` Florian Westphal
2016-10-19 15:56         ` Pablo Neira Ayuso

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=1476781962.2878.31.camel@redhat.com \
    --to=dcaratti@redhat.com \
    --cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
    --cc=fw@strlen.de \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pablo@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).