From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36463)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1QAMus-00029c-ST
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:49:03 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1QAMuo-00051q-8h
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:49:02 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:10131)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1QAMuo-00051l-0K
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:48:58 -0400
Message-ID: <4DA6FB44.3020208@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:48:52 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BANLkTikaXZHbkEsdqLepQdWqBxLQZr5=-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA47FEB.5070402@siemens.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DA47FEB.5070402@siemens.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Slirp reverse UDP firewall
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: Daisuke Nojiri <dnojiri@google.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 04/12/2011 07:38 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-04-12 18:19, Daisuke Nojiri wrote:
> >  This patch adds: -drop-udp, -allow-udp ADDR:PORT, -drop-log FILE
> >
> >    e.g.) $ qemu -net user -drop-log qemu.drop -drop-udp -allow-udp
> >  10.0.2.3:53
>
> No more stand-alone slirp arguments please. That syntax breaks when
> instantiating>1 back-ends.
>
> >
> >  -drop-udp enables usermode firewall for out-going UDP packats from a guest.
> >  All UDP packets except ones allowed by -allow-udp will be dropped. Dropped
> >  packets are logged in the file specified by FILE. PORT can be a single
> >  number
> >  (e.g. 53) or a range (e.g. [80-81]). If ADDR is ommitted, all addresses
> >  match
> >  the rule.
>
> Will we see a TCP firewall as well? Can we prepare for a more generic
> infrastructure, or what makes UDP special?

If some generic firewall like BPF is available as a user library, 
perhaps we can integrate one instead of writing a new one from scratch.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function