From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: xtables: add cluster match Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:05:04 +0100 Message-ID: <49A3FE90.50305@netfilter.org> References: <20090223101354.7104.45999.stgit@Decadence> <49A3FA4B.5000107@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:47848 "EHLO us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754230AbZBXNzd (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2009 08:55:33 -0500 In-Reply-To: <49A3FA4B.5000107@trash.net> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Patrick McHardy wrote: > Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >> +enum xt_cluster_flags { >> + XT_CLUSTER_F_INV = (1 << 0) >> +}; >> + >> +struct xt_cluster_match_info { >> + u_int32_t total_nodes; >> + u_int32_t node_mask; >> + u_int32_t hash_seed; >> + u_int32_t flags; >> +}; > > This doesn't seem like such a hot idea. I haven't seen the new > userspace patch, but assuming you're interested in the flags and > not ignoring them in userspace, the user has to specify the hash > seed for rule deletions. The user has to specify the hash seed to delete the rule if it's non-zero, otherwise it must be specified. The hash seed is optional. I don't quite see the problem. > You also have to chose the same seed for all nodes in a cluster. > This seems needlessly complicated, I'd suggest to simply use zero. One may want to forge traffic to flood a single node? The hash seed avoids this. -- "Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers