From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh6-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh6-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.157]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4277F144D3B for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 19:44:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.157 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721331890; cv=none; b=V/FixmuXwWyU1ooGB08A6BWnXZ5LToGb8gITBHSfv+Kp8TSt36fKFVpCmA7rEsQjui0vKj7p/7mA3MW91eYIsGXPrXEhk6728YrMnI6Jmn5NaYO/rWCoROkc1qHHYhf1VY2MVOOId4F4sPDnUsfOQPJ8IMH9U9JoJnA9d2Mdltg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721331890; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TTiHLqBqKZilxFvs5USFC/lCowGnZMB8NNMXC2TZdto=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:From:To:Subject:Content-Type; b=H0oPU4oWe9daogt/tExDnyVuespsRuLbpO9YE90zUmszXO5C+iv61n1BMHi1ww5l9CFTKyaKb0ppkWCe44X6cuo79Gp0PliBUCn2c19gsehQeoYUn0tDKgCm/ugHNsd/jhEA0OOr/C1r4kzm40U9Yo1P1WxHYRtFuFa2rizknqs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dev-mail.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev-mail.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dev-mail.net header.i=@dev-mail.net header.b=qrnkn+f6; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=vZT9hCii; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.157 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dev-mail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev-mail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dev-mail.net header.i=@dev-mail.net header.b="qrnkn+f6"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="vZT9hCii" Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailfhigh.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A57A1140176 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 15:44:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 18 Jul 2024 15:44:47 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dev-mail.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date:date :from:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:reply-to :subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1721331887; x=1721418287; bh=hN x55jIHuoVtglJPQf9NfBeRWs7nIVslnwk9rp3EGWg=; b=qrnkn+f6IRVSbF2EZb Prql1g2bwVsgUinYTHjzU7eqHdQksXEc3tr+5hvQBjmGFMxSRn3DmwKjx7OmO7So pL+1prX2lO3O2gFDowBxS2znlP7aTAgvPRzuk7FUTZLTeTJofPbIQRKvsEw5JYZ8 U1BEhhEgdTetD5aKl1JBTy9zZLl+8emYc++KZz68MRQd24Vq8TgBcvTVW51s/5+w UYUJomwqkJmdStBHLa+YE8+J8bbJReikfy/TLvzD1anACkgS+5FA8K306qU4IY9b gKlgpemmBT3yYvbyhCiw8ktviVzHKx2s5M7GAUs1ayUEhU3YRPIqqizX8Jdo7fQA tPAg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1721331887; x=1721418287; bh=hNx55jIHuoVtg lJPQf9NfBeRWs7nIVslnwk9rp3EGWg=; b=vZT9hCiiAbcdno/qXygfkdEFa0XUO gAZcre8vofDtt9dH6/0CCnsBk+f874Nuo27vYoSpxUTaueCE5WYz3COMdGHbHVNC lUC3toFdW0f7BEeKesgnkYyFIMWrkEtPStDkDQrKEJEJHIx1HLn8kglLnTp+B5RO XxAaZtd9CQeI+G4L0L8TJ36ltuNQA6FSPWH+68mgKwWj/swr/C55WjKVLcivOPD/ LU5vLVHh9sI+CqrQ70coR0WJ+aBsOTDkKcJvGi3CaaQ+v16ENNkrBrp+yM23YAtL NMyfplh1VF+gNlt+KzTkcGynplfNcSTGEevuzeUq7/wxhNyBRGzG6h8uw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrgeelgddufeelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefkffggfghrhffvufgtgfesthejre dttddvjeenucfhrhhomhepphhgnhguuceophhgnhguseguvghvqdhmrghilhdrnhgvtheq necuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhephfdtjeelveevudegieejhfejleehhfeltdeuhefhieekje ekieffteejgfdvueevnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghi lhhfrhhomhepphhgnhguseguvghvqdhmrghilhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if6e94526:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 15:44:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <374dc2fb-f3e1-4599-a46f-524fd894ee32@dev-mail.net> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 15:44:45 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netfilter@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Reply-To: pgnd@dev-mail.net From: pgnd Content-Language: en-US, fr, de-DE, pl, es-ES To: netfilter@vger.kernel.org Subject: syntax issues when reducing rules through grouping ? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit i've migrated some fw code to nftables, and am cleaning up my sources -- at this point, for my own readability. i've managed to so far miss any clear writeups on such housekeeping, so using some trial-n-error :-/ when involving marks in nat/mangle chains, what's valid, or not, is a bit fuzzy. in this sample script cat tmp.nft #!/usr/sbin/nft -f define VPN = "A" define LAN = "B" define SVR1 = "1.1.1.1" define SVR2 = "2.2.2.2" table nat { chain prerouting { type nat hook prerouting priority -150; policy accept; # SET1 meta mark set 0x02 meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR1 udp dport 53 meta mark set 0x02 meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR1 tcp dport 53 meta mark set 0x02 meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR2 udp dport 25 meta mark set 0x02 meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR2 tcp dport 465 # SET2 (This seem a bit tortured, but it's fewer lines ...) meta mark set 0x02 meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR1 meta l4proto {tcp, udp} th dport 53 meta mark set 0x02 meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR2 tcp dport { 25, 465 } # SET3 meta mark set 0x02 { 24 meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR1 meta l4proto {tcp, udp} th dport 53 25 meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR2 tcp dport { 25, 465 } 26 } 27 28 } 29 } rule group "SETs" 1, 2 & 3 are _intended_ to be functionally equivalent, but simply increasingly "grouped" for convenience/readability (yes, arguable!) testing, SET1 & SET2 seem OK, but SET3 is clearly unhappy, nft -c -f tmp.nft tmp.nft:24:4-7: Error: syntax error, unexpected meta meta iifname "$VPN" meta oifname "$LAN" ip daddr $SVR1 meta l4proto {tcp, udp} th dport 53 ^^^^ tmp.nft:29:1-1: Error: syntax error, unexpected '}' } ^ what's specifically DISallowed in my SET3 syntax usage? what'd be the 'most grouped' that SET can validly be?