From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 14:28:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BB49155.3000902@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.01.1004011410250.17429@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Thursday 2010-04-01 13:56, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>>>>> just to defragment the packets in conntrack
>>>>>> immediately afterwards
>> This was supposed to read "one more *de*fragmentation pass. In
>> IPv6 we don't have to refragment, but simply output the original
>> fragments.
>>
>>> Assuming [nf-packet-flow.png] as a base, there are two
>>> spots in which conntrack/defrag happens: PREROUTING and OUTPUT.
>>> [...]
>>> We never see fragments in the ruleset
>>>
>>> a) for netif_rx received packets, defrag will be run early
>>> (yes, there's raw, but that's special anyway)
>>>
>>> b) locally-generated packets are fragmented only after all of
>>> Netfilter is done.
>> You're assuming conntrack is used.
>
> That was what your original message was about, was it not?
Partially, but the ruleset construction point you replied to of
course only applies when conntrack is not used.
> If there is no nf_defrag loaded, there is not much left besides
> the standard IPv4 stack defrag on input, the fragmentation
> on output, and the double-fragmentation on forward.
>
> What did I miss?
Now I seem to be missing something. Why are we suddenly talking
about IPv4 and nf_defrag?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-01 12:28 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
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 [this message]
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=4BB49155.3000902@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.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).