From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: kaber@trash.net, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:50:06 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BB47A5E.6090205@linux-ipv6.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1270031487-15094-2-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de>
Hello.
(2010/03/31 19:31), Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> Patrick McHardy notes: "We used to invoke IPv4 POST_ROUTING after
> fragmentation as well just to defragment the packets in conntrack
> immediately afterwards, but that got changed during the
> netfilter-ipsec integration. Ideally IPv6 would behave like IPv4."
>
> This patch makes it so. Sending an oversized frame (e.g. `ping6
> -s64000 -c1 ::1`) will now show up in POSTROUTING as a single skb
> rather than multiple ones.
I am not in favor doing this
because we theoretically make fragments __before__ routing
in output path (as we reassemble __after__ routing in input path).
IMHO, FORWARDING and POSTROUTING share similar semantics
from routing POV.
As we see "fragments" in FORWARDING, we should see
fragments in POST_ROUTING, at least in IPv6.
--yoshfuji
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-01 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-31 10:31 nf-next: TEE and nesting Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 1/5] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 10:50 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki [this message]
2010-04-01 10:57 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 11:17 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-01 11:50 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 11:56 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-01 12:13 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 12:28 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-01 22:48 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-07 13:24 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 2/5] net: ipv6: add IPSKB_REROUTED exclusion to NF_HOOK/POSTROUTING invocation Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 3/5] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt_TEE Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 4/5] netfilter: xtables2: make ip_tables reentrant Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:31 ` [PATCH 5/5] netfilter: xt_TEE: have cloned packet travel through Xtables too Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:33 ` nf-next: TEE and nesting Patrick McHardy
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-31 10:38 Jan Engelhardt
2010-03-31 10:38 ` [PATCH 1/5] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-01 10:23 ` Patrick McHardy
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=4BB47A5E.6090205@linux-ipv6.org \
--to=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--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).