> 1)  There are now two new sections in the rules file:
> 
>     INVALID
>[...]
>       NOTRACK_DISPOSITION
> 
>           Valid values are CONTINUE, ACCEPT, DROP, REJECT, A_ACCEPT
>           and A_DROP.
> 
>           The default is CONTINUE, which provides compatibility with
>           earlier releases (the packets are subject to the rules in
>           the NEW section).
> 
>         NOTRACK_LOG_LEVEL.
> 
>           Determines logging of packets handled by
>           NOTRACK_DISPOSITION. Empty by default (no logging).
> 
1. Optimise same-jump and same-match rules which have different states:

-A net2fw -m conntrack --ctstate ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
-A net2fw -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED -j ACCEPT

could be optimised to

-A net2fw -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT

2. INVALID_DISPOSITION: A_REJECT, A_ACCEPT and ACCEPT were accepted by 
shorewall (no errors were given), though these were ultimately ignored as no 
iptables rules were produced.

At an earlier stage of the testing of this, INVALID_DISPOSITION option seemed 
to be completely ignored whatever value I specified - if I have 
"INVALID_DISPOSITION=DROP" in shorewall.conf for example, there was nothing 
generated with INVALID state match and DROP jump. Unfortunately, I was not able 
to reproduce this at the later stages.

3. UNTRACKED_DISPOSITION (this is listed as NOTRACK_DISPOSITION in the 
announcement above, though "shorewall update" converts it and treats it as 
UNTRACKED_DISPOSITION): CONTINUE works, ACCEPT and A_ACCEPT are ignored 
completely for whatever reason (I expected -j ACCEPT/A_ACCEPT), A_DROP is 
accepted and works (this wasn't in the announcement) and A_REJECT is accepted 
(no syntax error is given), but ultimately no iptables rule is produced.

The strangest thing for UNTRACKED_DISPOSITION as well was, that at one stage 
(at the beginning of the testing) I was able to produce an adequate rule only 
for some of the chains: I had the appropriate "--cstate UNTRACKED -j <ACTION>" 
generated for my fw2local and local2fw for example, but not for fw2net and 
net2fw chains. Again, I was unable to reproduce this later on, unfortunately!

4. "SECTION UNTRACKED" is accepted (while "SECTION NOTRACK" isn't) as a section 
statement in (at least) "rules" (not that I am complaining as to me it is more 
intuitive) - "ERROR: Invalid SECTION (NOTRACK)" is shown.

5. Similar to 1. above: if I have exactly the same statements in any two 
sections in "rules" (say INVALID and UNTRACKED), the chain itself is properly 
optimised, but the "state" isn't. I get this instead:

-A fw2net -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j ~comb0
-A fw2net -m conntrack --ctstate UNTRACKED -j ~comb0

That should have been "-A fw2net -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID,UNTRACKED -j 
~comb0"



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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_jan
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to