Re: Any issues with packet updates?
Bart De Schuymer <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.network.bridge.ebtables.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Monday 21 April 2003 20:10, Scott MacKay wrote: > I actually went and tried shifting the QUEUE entries > to INPUT & OUTPUT instead of PREROUTING and > POSTROUTING, since my current tests are on the 2 boxes > themselves and not the hosts behind them. That > actually worked generating the proper results. Why > this worked and not PRE/POST routing is beyond > me...thanks! All IP traffic that is between hosts on one side of the bridge is seen by the PREROUTING chains and not by the FORWARD chains. What happens if you only queue specific IP traffic in the PREROUTING chain? Does using POSTROUTING slow things down? That would be strange... > The bigger problem to detect is thru traffic, tho. I > believe I get a ipq_packet_msg_t entry, not a sk_buff > up thru to the userspace iptables QUEUE target. > Unless I am looking at the wrong header, I do not see > how to get the sk_buff which would have the > physindev/physoutdev fields. Is there a separate > function call to get the sk_buff (and thus the > nf_bridge field)? Sorry, I thought you wrote your own netfilter queue implementation. You'll need to hack net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_queue.c to get this data to userspace then. I'm not very familiar with that implementation. -- cheers, Bart ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf