Linux Netfilter discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Grant Taylor <gtaylor@riverviewtech.net>
To: Mail List - Netfilter <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org>
Subject: Re: problem with (incorrectly?) INVALID packets
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 22:48:33 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45837AA1.6030508@riverviewtech.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200612151134.35827.mike@v6.gaima.co.uk>

On 12/15/06 05:34, Mike Williams wrote:

<really big snip>

> Routing table now:
> # route -n 
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
> 90.1...1.64    0.0.0.0         255.255.255.224 U     0      0        0 bond0
> 192.168.131.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 bond1
> 192.168.22.0    90.1...1.69    255.255.255.0   UG    0      0        0 bond0
> 192.168.128.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 bond3
> 192.168.0.0     90.1...1.69    255.255.255.0   UG    0      0        0 bond0
> 192.168.30.0    90.1...1.69    255.255.255.0   UG    0      0        0 bond0
> 192.168.136.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 bond2
> 127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 lo
> 0.0.0.0         90.1...1.69    0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 bond0
> 
> Routing table previously:
> # route -n
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
> 90.1...1.64    0.0.0.0         255.255.255.224 U     0      0        0 br0
> 192.168.131.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 bond1
> 192.168.22.0    90.1...1.69    255.255.255.0   UG    0      0        0 br0
> 192.168.128.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 bond3
> 192.168.0.0     90.1...1.69    255.255.255.0   UG    0      0        0 br0
> 192.168.30.0    90.1...1.69    255.255.255.0   UG    0      0        0 br0
> 192.168.136.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 bond2
> 127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 lo
> 0.0.0.0         90.1...1.69    0.0.0.0         UG    1000   0        0 br0

Sorry, if I have missed it, but which system are these routing tables 
from?  Bridge or LFW?

> # uname -r
> 2.6.17-hardened-r1
> # zgrep BRIDGE_NETFILTER /proc/config.gz
> CONFIG_BRIDGE_NETFILTER=y

This means that you will be able to use IPTables to filter your bridged 
traffic.  Which as I think about it, with out seeing your full IPTables 
rule set, may be the reason some of your packets are having their state 
incorrectly identified.  Can we see a full iptables-save output?



Grant. . . .


  reply	other threads:[~2006-12-16  4:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-12-12 19:42 problem with (incorrectly?) INVALID packets Mike Williams
2006-12-13  3:11 ` Grant Taylor
2006-12-13 12:39   ` Mike Williams
2006-12-13 23:27     ` Grant Taylor
2006-12-15 11:34       ` Mike Williams
2006-12-16  4:48         ` Grant Taylor [this message]
2006-12-15  9:15     ` Mike Williams

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=45837AA1.6030508@riverviewtech.net \
    --to=gtaylor@riverviewtech.net \
    --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