>> routes
>> ~~~~
>> main 10.0.0.0/8 blackhole
>> main 10.0.0.0/8 prohibit
>>
>> generates:
>>
>> run_ip route add blackhole 10.0.0.0/8 table 254
>> run_ip route add prohibit 10.0.0.0/8 table 254
>>
>> That is not going to work (ip will complain that the route already 
>> exists). A much cleaner solution to this would be if shorewall could 
>> spot the overlap during compile time (don't know how doable that would 
>> be), or, if that is not possible, to change "add" with replace, in which 
>> case the latest route added will take precedence.
>>     
>
> The attached patch replaces 'add' with 'replace'.
>   
I don't like this very much, if I am being honest. Debugging ip tables 
rules is hard enough, but tracing routing is even harder. Even though I 
suggested the 'replace' solution, I was hoping that shorewall would be 
able to get this checked at source, if possible. To me it doesn't 
require anything sophisticated - an exact match (i.e. a string 
comparison of sort) is only required.

If a 'replace' instead of shorewall error-checking is adopted, then 
identical routes will be swallowed silently and to then find what went 
wrong (if it does) will be much harder.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to