netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
	lschlesinger@drivenets.com, dsahern@kernel.org,
	crosser@average.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/2] vrf: run conntrack only in context of lower/physdev for locally generated packets
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:16:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YXf/tlpw0ARmS8j5@salvia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211026125858.GA18032@breakpoint.cc>

On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 02:58:58PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> wrote:
> > If the motion for these hooks in the driver is to match for 'oif vrf',
> > now that there is an egress hook, it might make more sense to filter
> > from there based on the interface rather than adding these hook calls
> > from the vrf driver?
> > 
> > I wonder if, in the future, it makes sense to entirely disable these
> > hooks in the vrf driver and rely on egress hook?
> 
> Agree, it would be better to support ingress+egress hhoks from vrf
> so vrf specific filtering can be done per-device.
> 
> I don't think we can just remove the existing NF_HOOK()s in vrf though.

I understand, there are people relying on this.

> We could add toggles to disable them, but I'm not sure how to best
> expose that (ip link attribute, ethtool, sysctl ...)...?

I would make it global toggle. As you mentioned it might be good to
explore an alternative to this via the ingress+egress hooks now that
the usecases are better known?

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-26 13:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-25 14:13 [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] vrf: rework interaction with netfilter/conntrack Florian Westphal
2021-10-25 14:13 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 1/2] netfilter: conntrack: skip confirmation and nat hooks in postrouting for vrf Florian Westphal
2021-10-25 14:14 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 2/2] vrf: run conntrack only in context of lower/physdev for locally generated packets Florian Westphal
2021-10-25 14:25   ` David Ahern
2021-10-26 12:36   ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2021-10-26 12:58     ` Florian Westphal
2021-10-26 13:16       ` Pablo Neira Ayuso [this message]
2021-10-26 12:30 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] vrf: rework interaction with netfilter/conntrack patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=YXf/tlpw0ARmS8j5@salvia \
    --to=pablo@netfilter.org \
    --cc=crosser@average.org \
    --cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
    --cc=fw@strlen.de \
    --cc=lschlesinger@drivenets.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --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).