Your message dated Thu, 19 Feb 2009 15:04:26 -0500
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#516174: incorrect bahviour of the -c options from
iptables-restor and -save?
has caused the Debian Bug report #516174,
regarding [nop] incorrect bahviour of the -c options from
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
516174: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=516174
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: iptables
Version: 1.4.2-6
Severity: normal
Hi.
According the manpage:
iptables-restore
-c, --counters
restore the values of all packet and byte counters
=> So I assume, that when not specifying -c,.. the counters should not
be restored.
However, when I have [0:0] in the files it is restors (to 0:0) even
without specifying -c,... for values != 0... it works as expected.
iptables-save
-c, --counters
include the current values of all packet and byte counters in
the output
=> I assume this means,.. the counter should only be included,.. when
-c is given.
However, they're alawys dumped.
btw: is there a difference between:
:INPUT [0:0]
and
:INPUT
(etc)?
Thanks,
Chris.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 5.0
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-heisenberg (SMP w/2 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages iptables depends on:
ii libc6 2.9-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries
iptables recommends no packages.
iptables suggests no packages.
-- no debconf information
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
retitle 516174 [nop] incorrect bahviour of the -c options from
iptables-restor and -save?
thanks
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer
<[email protected]> wrote:
> According the manpage:
As you've described, iptables-restore is working exactly as the man
page prescribes. Without -c, the counters are zero'd out. With -c, the
counters are set to whatever was in the input...
> btw: is there a difference between:
> :INPUT [0:0]
> and
> :INPUT
> (etc)?
iptables-save should not give the latter. Perhaps the man page should
explicitly state that iptables-save formatted input is expected for
iptables-restore.
--- End Message ---
