From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dennison Williams Subject: Re: MARK not working Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 13:35:27 -0700 Message-ID: <4BB6550F.6030204@gmail.com> References: <4BB53BEC.9010709@gmail.com> <20100402065742.23be08f0@catlap> <4BB59C59.50607@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OifW/AJ7N37O0qlR3ERxD/glAJaoJkte8iGbzj+Z66M=; b=TSdVkT1gtc97MoPlgJ2ehLJufliMiR0kPm9FUa9qGLAVw8HI27ye2vpIffUusFwrGc kvnt6Z3Cl90+W64o63GCB7IgX2WhqIfcTSyldTkdvTRDaQ+XTMvqEj+83lbcGWrcSwDf Q/QYZBWqrrjRCRDiPZ9JM0oSaui2A2C3oA388= In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: netfilter@vger.kernel.org Jan Engelhardt wrote: > There is your mark-1 packet, and right above it is the ESTABLISHED > rule that catches all the other packets that have this condition, > including those marked 1 which are subsequent in the IKE talk > Right you are. I messed around with the order of the rules and noticed that the packets were in fact getting marked. It turns out I misdiagnosed the problem which seems to actually be with the vpn software not encapsulating the packets. Thanks for your time. Sincerely, Dennison Williams