Re: #923880 - "iptables -m tos --tos mask value is wrong"

Helmut Grohne <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.devel.ssh
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Job,

Thanks for reaching out.

On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 10:57:06AM +0000, Job Snijders wrote:
> Today I stumbled across the "temporary workaround" patch that is
> https://sources.debian.org/src/openssh/1:8.4p1-5+deb11u3/debian/patches/revert-ipqos-defaults.patch/
> caused by this report: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=923880
> 
> Reading the associated threads it seems that VMware fixed their
> products by now, but I wasn't able to find pointers to threads that
> describe the problem in iptables and the solution (or if any solution
> was created?).
> 
> Do you know whether the revert-ipqos-defaults.patch really still is
> needed?

As the submitter of the issue, I am in favour of dropping the patch at 
the beginning of the forky cycle. Rationale as follows.
 * If I remember correctly, the change was introduced relatively close 
   to a freeze and it posed difficulties to adapt iptables. Hence, I 
   proposed *temporarily* reverting the change in ssh to give users
   more time to adapt and prepare.
 * It is now clear that iptables will not be fixed. The suggested 
   workaround is to use numeric values. This workaround is deployable on 
   old iptables versions.
 * We're transitioning from iptables to nftables, so compatibility with 
   iptables becomes less of a concern. It still is, but the weight of 
   the argument decays.
 * Debian is now deviating from the rest of the world and such deviation 
   is always a downside.

The change likely warrants a NEWS entry.

> But it seems Colin Watson doesn't want to remove the
> revert-ipqos-defaults patch without users or developers confirming the
> issue is resolved.

This characterization seems unlikely to me. I'd like to hear what Colin 
says himself.

Helmut
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.