Linux Netfilter discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Opperisano <opie@817west.com>
To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: Differences between -j MARK and -j CONNMARK
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 07:40:34 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1108125634.4489.24.camel@hubcap.ljm.dom> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <009f01c5101f$6302ddd0$910010ac@coco>

On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 04:52, Omar Garcia wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> What`s the differences between these two groups of rules.?????
> In the first i use MARK --set-mark to mark packets and in the other i use CONNMARK --set-mark
> 
> 1.
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -j CONNMARK --restore-mark
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -m mark ! --mark 0 -j ACCEPT
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -m ipp2p --ipp2p -j MARK --set-mark 30
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -m ipp2p --bit -j MARK --set-mark 30
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -j CONNMARK --save-mark
> 
> 2.
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -j CONNMARK --restore-mark
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -m mark ! --mark 0 -j ACCEPT
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -m ipp2p --ipp2p -j CONNMARK --set-mark 30
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -m ipp2p --bit -j CONNMARK --set-mark 30
>     # iptables -I POSTROUTING -t mangle -j CONNMARK --save-mark

first off--i'm sure this is just your typed example, but you *do*
realize that using -I in every rule results in your rules ending up in
reverse order, right?  that is, your first group of commands will result
in the following rules:

  *mangle
  -A POSTROUTING -j CONNMARK --save-mark
  -A POSTROUTING -m ipp2p --bit -j MARK --set-mark 30
  -A POSTROUTING -m ipp2p --ipp2p -j MARK --set-mark 30
  -A POSTROUTING -m mark ! --mark 0 -j ACCEPT
  -A POSTROUTING -j CONNMARK --restore-mark

which is most certainly *not* the order you want when using
--restore-mark and --save mark.

anyways--to your actual question--i have found that version 1; i.e using
-j MARK --set-mark instead of -j CONNMARK --set-mark, is more reliable. 
i have no idea why this is.  i have a feeling that the CONNMARK target
uses more intelligence to determine whether this packet should be marked
or not.  -j MARK --set-mark will just simply mark the packet; no fuss,
no muss, and then -j CONNMARK --save-mark will save it to the conntrack
table to be restored on the next packet in the connection--which is
exactly what you want.

-j

--
"Alright brain, you don't like me and I don't like you. But let's just
 get through this and then I can get back to killing you with beer."
	--The Simpsons



  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-02-11 12:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-02-11  9:52 Differences between -j MARK and -j CONNMARK Omar Garcia
2005-02-11 10:05 ` Vinod Chandran
2005-02-11 12:40 ` Jason Opperisano [this message]
2005-02-11 12:59   ` Omar Garcia
2005-02-20 23:33   ` Ian! D. Allen

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=1108125634.4489.24.camel@hubcap.ljm.dom \
    --to=opie@817west.com \
    --cc=netfilter@lists.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