> -A vmbr0-FW -m mark --mark 1 -j ACCEPT 
>>This is what we have currently. But this blocks traffic to 'unmanaged' tap 
>>devices (VMs with no firewall) 

Yes, indeed, because we don't mark unmanaged tap, so it can't go to the accept


>>So we would have: 
>>
>>-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-in -j vmbr0-OUT 
>>-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-out -j vmbr0-IN 
>>-A vmbr0-FW -m mark --mark 1 -j ACCEPT 
>>-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-out --physdev-is-bridged -j ACCEPT 
>>
>>But what exactly is the differenc to the original solution? 
>>
>>-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-in -j vmbr0-OUT 
>>-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-out -j vmbr0-IN 
>>-A vmbr0-FW -j ACCEPT 
>>
>>Can you see/explain the difference? 

>>-A vmbr0-FW -m mark --mark 1 -j ACCEPT   
  ACCEPT for managed tap rules
>>-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-out --physdev-is-bridged -j ACCEPT 
 ACCEPT for other interfaces (unmanaged tap or ethx), but this is only for 
outgoing packets for ethX (bridge->eth) or incoming packets for unmanaged tap 
(bridge->tap)




I don't remember, Why can't we simply use 

-A vmbr0-FW -j ACCEPT  ?  (instead -A vmbr0-FW -m mark --mark 1 -j ACCEPT )

for managed tap, if we don't have a DROP in tapchains, we should accept when 
returning in vmbr0-FW
for unmanaged tap or ethX, we should ACCEPT in any case at the end of vmbr0-FW 
too.



----- Mail original ----- 

De: "Dietmar Maurer" <[email protected]> 
À: "Alexandre DERUMIER" <[email protected]> 
Cc: [email protected] 
Envoyé: Jeudi 27 Février 2014 08:53:50 
Objet: RE: [pve-devel] [PATCH 2/2] bridge rules : -j ACCEPT for physical 
interfaces 

I am still confused about those bridge chains: 

> > -A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-in --physdev-is-bridged -j 
> > vmbr0-OUT -A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-out --physdev-is- 
> bridged 
> > -j vmbr0-IN -A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-out 
> > --physdev-is-bridged -j ACCEPT (maybe this is better ?) 
> 
> After my change, I guess we need to add such ruke additionally: 
> 
> -A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-in -j vmbr0-OUT 
> -A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-out -j vmbr0-IN 
> -A vmbr0-FW -m mark --mark 1 -j ACCEPT 

This is what we have currently. But this blocks traffic to 'unmanaged' tap 
devices (VMs with no firewall) 

> -A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-out --physdev-is-bridged -j ACCEPT 

Seems to solve that. 

So we would have: 

-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-in -j vmbr0-OUT 
-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-out -j vmbr0-IN 
-A vmbr0-FW -m mark --mark 1 -j ACCEPT 
-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-out --physdev-is-bridged -j ACCEPT 

But what exactly is the differenc to the original solution? 

-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-in -j vmbr0-OUT 
-A vmbr0-FW -m physdev --physdev-is-bridged --physdev-is-out -j vmbr0-IN 
-A vmbr0-FW -j ACCEPT 

Can you see/explain the difference? 
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel

Reply via email to