Re: [PATCH] NAT and requests to unrouted targets
Martin Schiller wrote: > On Monday, March 19, 2007 5:02 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >>Could you try this patch (against current -git) with CONFIG_XFRM >>enabled please? > > > I've tried it and the ping is still working now with enabled CONFIG_XFRM. > > Thanks for the patch. Thanks for testing, I'll push it upstream soon. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
RE: [PATCH] NAT and requests to unrouted targets
On Monday, March 19, 2007 5:02 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote: > Martin Schiller wrote: >> To be more exactly, it's the examination of >> "ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all != >> ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all" which is only be done if XFRM >> is configured. Since I don't need this anyway, I deactivated XFRM >> now and my "ping -I" is working now. > > > Could you try this patch (against current -git) with CONFIG_XFRM > enabled please? I've tried it and the ping is still working now with enabled CONFIG_XFRM. Thanks for the patch. Regards, Martin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] NAT and requests to unrouted targets
Martin Schiller wrote:
> To be more exactly, it's the examination of
> "ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all != ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all"
> which is only be done if XFRM is configured. Since I don't need this anyway,
> I deactivated XFRM now and my "ping -I" is working now.
Could you try this patch (against current -git) with CONFIG_XFRM
enabled please?
diff --git a/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
b/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
index adf25f9..6bcfdf6 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
@@ -253,14 +253,17 @@ ip_nat_local_fn(unsigned int hooknum,
enum ip_conntrack_dir dir = CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo);
if (ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.ip !=
- ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.ip
-#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM
- || ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all !=
- ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all
-#endif
- )
+ ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.ip) {
if (ip_route_me_harder(pskb, RTN_UNSPEC))
ret = NF_DROP;
+ }
+#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM
+ else if (ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all !=
+ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all)
+ if (ip_xfrm_me_harder(pskb))
+ ret = NF_DROP;
+#endif
+
}
return ret;
}
diff --git a/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_standalone.c
b/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_standalone.c
index e4d3ef1..15aa3db 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_standalone.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_nat_standalone.c
@@ -245,14 +245,16 @@ nf_nat_local_fn(unsigned int hooknum,
enum ip_conntrack_dir dir = CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo);
if (ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u3.ip !=
- ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u3.ip
-#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM
- || ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all !=
- ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all
-#endif
- )
+ ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u3.ip) {
if (ip_route_me_harder(pskb, RTN_UNSPEC))
ret = NF_DROP;
+ }
+#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM
+ else if (ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all !=
+ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all)
+ if (ip_xfrm_me_harder(pskb))
+ ret = NF_DROP;
+#endif
}
return ret;
}
Re: [PATCH] NAT and requests to unrouted targets
Martin Schiller wrote:
> Well, the really responsible code is the following:
>
>
> static unsigned int
> ip_nat_local_fn(unsigned int hooknum,
> struct sk_buff **pskb,
> const struct net_device *in,
> const struct net_device *out,
> int (*okfn)(struct sk_buff *))
> {
> struct ip_conntrack *ct;
> enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;
> unsigned int ret;
>
> /* root is playing with raw sockets. */
> if ((*pskb)->len < sizeof(struct iphdr)
> || (*pskb)->nh.iph->ihl * 4 < sizeof(struct iphdr))
> return NF_ACCEPT;
>
> ret = ip_nat_fn(hooknum, pskb, in, out, okfn);
> if (ret != NF_DROP && ret != NF_STOLEN
> && (ct = ip_conntrack_get(*pskb, &ctinfo)) != NULL) {
> enum ip_conntrack_dir dir = CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo);
>
> if (ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.ip !=
> ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.ip
> #ifdef CONFIG_XFRM
> || ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all !=
> ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all
> #endif
> )
> if (ip_route_me_harder(pskb, RTN_UNSPEC))
> ret = NF_DROP;
> }
> return ret;
> }
>
>
> To be more exactly, it's the examination of
> "ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all != ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all"
> which is only be done if XFRM is configured. Since I don't need this anyway,
> I deactivated XFRM now and my "ping -I" is working now.
You're right, that doesn't really work for ICMP since the tuples are
asymetric even without NAT. I didn't expect the unnecessary call to
ip_route_me_harder to have any side-effects. I'll look into fixing
this properly.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
RE: [PATCH] NAT and requests to unrouted targets
On Thursday, March 15, 2007 9:51 AM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> diff -uNpr linux-2.6.19.org/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
> linux-2.6.19/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
> --- linux-2.6.19.org/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
> 2006-11-29 22:57:37.0 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.19/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c 2007-03-15
> 08:25:11.0 +0100
> @@ -191,11 +191,13 @@ ip_nat_in(unsigned int hooknum,
>int (*okfn)(struct sk_buff *)) {
> unsigned int ret;
> + __be32 saddr = (*pskb)->nh.iph->saddr;
> __be32 daddr = (*pskb)->nh.iph->daddr;
>
> ret = ip_nat_fn(hooknum, pskb, in, out, okfn);
> if (ret != NF_DROP && ret != NF_STOLEN
> - && daddr != (*pskb)->nh.iph->daddr) {
> + && ((*pskb)->nh.iph->saddr != saddr
> + || (*pskb)->nh.iph->daddr != daddr)) {
> dst_release((*pskb)->dst);
> (*pskb)->dst = NULL;
> }
>
> I don't see how this would change anything, the PRE_ROUTING hook
> doesn't change the source address, so the comparison is unnecessary,
> additionally the dst_release is only needed for loopback because
> packets received from a real interface don't have a route attached at
> this time.
Sorry, you are right. This wouldn't change anything.
I've tested so much to find the responsible peace of code for my problem, so
i messed up some things here.
Well, the really responsible code is the following:
static unsigned int
ip_nat_local_fn(unsigned int hooknum,
struct sk_buff **pskb,
const struct net_device *in,
const struct net_device *out,
int (*okfn)(struct sk_buff *))
{
struct ip_conntrack *ct;
enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;
unsigned int ret;
/* root is playing with raw sockets. */
if ((*pskb)->len < sizeof(struct iphdr)
|| (*pskb)->nh.iph->ihl * 4 < sizeof(struct iphdr))
return NF_ACCEPT;
ret = ip_nat_fn(hooknum, pskb, in, out, okfn);
if (ret != NF_DROP && ret != NF_STOLEN
&& (ct = ip_conntrack_get(*pskb, &ctinfo)) != NULL) {
enum ip_conntrack_dir dir = CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo);
if (ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.ip !=
ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.ip
#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM
|| ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all !=
ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all
#endif
)
if (ip_route_me_harder(pskb, RTN_UNSPEC))
ret = NF_DROP;
}
return ret;
}
To be more exactly, it's the examination of
"ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u.all != ct->tuplehash[!dir].tuple.src.u.all"
which is only be done if XFRM is configured. Since I don't need this anyway,
I deactivated XFRM now and my "ping -I" is working now.
Regards, Martin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] NAT and requests to unrouted targets
Martin Schiller wrote:
> This patch changes the behaivor of the iptables nat module to the style
> before release 2.6.16 so it is possible again to use the "ping -I
> " command to send icmp requests to a target for which no route
> exists.
Please attach patches inline and send netfilter related patches to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoted for reference:
diff -uNpr linux-2.6.19.org/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
linux-2.6.19/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
--- linux-2.6.19.org/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c
2006-11-29 22:57:37.0 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.19/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c 2007-03-15
08:25:11.0 +0100
@@ -191,11 +191,13 @@ ip_nat_in(unsigned int hooknum,
int (*okfn)(struct sk_buff *))
{
unsigned int ret;
+ __be32 saddr = (*pskb)->nh.iph->saddr;
__be32 daddr = (*pskb)->nh.iph->daddr;
ret = ip_nat_fn(hooknum, pskb, in, out, okfn);
if (ret != NF_DROP && ret != NF_STOLEN
- && daddr != (*pskb)->nh.iph->daddr) {
+ && ((*pskb)->nh.iph->saddr != saddr
+ || (*pskb)->nh.iph->daddr != daddr)) {
dst_release((*pskb)->dst);
(*pskb)->dst = NULL;
}
I don't see how this would change anything, the PRE_ROUTING hook
doesn't change the source address, so the comparison is unnecessary,
additionally the dst_release is only needed for loopback because
packets received from a real interface don't have a route attached
at this time.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
