Re: iptables NEW TABLE request. WAS[Re: Catching un-DNAT'ed packets]

["Покотиленко Костик" <casper@meteor.dp.ua>]

В Срд, 31/01/2007 в 12:38 +0100, Pascal Hambourg пишет:
> Hello
> 
> Pokotilenko Kostik a écrit :
> >>
> >>  -t nat -A POSTROUTING -m conntrack --ctstate DNAT --ctorigdst x.x.x.x
> > 
> > Just to make sure. This rule will match the packets with canntrack state
> > "DNAT" and whose original (before DNAT) destination address was x.x.x.x,
> > right?
> 
> This is my understanding. However I would recommend not to put such a 
> rule in the nat table because chains in the nat table do not see reply 
> packets.
> 
> > If I add -j ULOG to this rule what would be logged packet source address
> > for replay packet (Server->Client)? Original, that client was initially
> > connected to, or real, that was set during DNAT? 
> 
> The rule would log the current packet source address as usual, so it 
> won't show the original destination address unless you had put it in the 
> --log-prefix option.
> 
> > By the way does -m conntrack --ctstate DNAT --ctorigdst x.x.x.x match
> > request or replay packets or packets belonging to connection which was
> > originally made to x.x.x.x?
> 
>  From my understanding, the latter. "Original" and "reply" usually refer 
> to connection tracking, not individual packets. However I am not sure 
> whether it would match the first packet creating the connection, can 
> anyone confirm ?

Can someone confirm this? If there is a way to do what I want then there
is no need for new table in iptables.

-- 
Покотиленко Костик <casper@meteor.dp.ua>