Thread (67 messages) 67 messages, 11 authors, 2012-08-29

Re: [PATCH 05/19] netfilter: nf_conntrack_ipv6: improve fragmentation handling

From: Patrick McHardy <hidden>
Date: 2012-08-19 19:44:35
Also in: netfilter-devel

On Sun, 19 Aug 2012, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 14:26 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
quoted
quoted
Could you provide an iptables command/rule, that trigger this code path?
The easiest way is a large ping with the NAT patches also applied,
in that case we also pass the first packet of a connection through
the stack reassembled.
So, a fragmented IPv6 ICMPv6 packet, I assume?
Correct.
Don't I need to load some of the helper modules, or just the
nf_conntrack_ipv6 module, or perhaps only nf_defrag_ipv6 ?
Not with the entire patchset, just IPv6 conntrack is enough. Aith IPv6 NAT
the first packet of a connection must always be defragemented, independant
of an assigned helper.
quoted
quoted
quoted
@@ -199,9 +200,13 @@ static unsigned int ipv6_confirm(unsigned int hooknum,
 static unsigned int __ipv6_conntrack_in(struct net *net,
 					unsigned int hooknum,
 					struct sk_buff *skb,
+					const struct net_device *in,
+					const struct net_device *out,
 					int (*okfn)(struct sk_buff *))
 {
 	struct sk_buff *reasm = skb->nfct_reasm;
+	struct nf_conn *ct;
+	enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;

 	/* This packet is fragmented and has reassembled packet. */
 	if (reasm) {
@@ -213,6 +218,20 @@ static unsigned int __ipv6_conntrack_in(struct net *net,
 			if (ret != NF_ACCEPT)
 				return ret;
 		}
+
+		/* Conntrack helpers need the entire reassembled packet in the
+		 * POST_ROUTING hook.
+		 */
+		ct = nf_ct_get(reasm, &ctinfo);
+		if (ct != NULL && test_bit(IPS_HELPER_BIT, &ct->status)) {
+			nf_conntrack_get_reasm(skb);
+			NF_HOOK_THRESH(NFPROTO_IPV6, hooknum, reasm,
+				       (struct net_device *)in,
+				       (struct net_device *)out,
+				       okfn, NF_IP6_PRI_CONNTRACK + 1);
Hook prio change to NF_IP6_PRI_CONNTRACK + 1
I didn't get this part, you want to change to PRE_CONNTRACK + 1? What
about raw and SELinux?
No - I don't want any changes.

I was just pointing out *where* the changes occur in your patch. This is
just a "service" to other email readers, so they can spot the changes
faster, I were referring to.
Could you send me your patch so I get a better picture of what you're 
doing exactly?
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help