Tom,

Yes indeed, I figured that out last night. I changed my configuration as follows (after reading more docs):

tcrules:
1        $FW            0.0.0.0/0       udp     4569
1        $FW            0.0.0.0/0       tcp     4569
1        $FW            0.0.0.0/0       udp     5060
1        $FW            0.0.0.0/0       tcp     5060
2        0.0.0.0/0      0.0.0.0/0       icmp    echo-request
2        0.0.0.0/0      0.0.0.0/0       icmp    echo-reply
3        0.0.0.0/0      0.0.0.0/0       tcp     20
3        0.0.0.0/0      0.0.0.0/0       tcp     21
3        0.0.0.0/0      0.0.0.0/0       tcp     22

Which results in a shorewall show mangle:

Chain tcout (1 references)
pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 4431 1015K MARK udp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:4569 MARK set 0x1 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:4569 MARK set 0x1 115 65437 MARK udp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:5060 MARK set 0x1 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:5060 MARK set 0x1

Chain tcpost (1 references)
pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 4531 1073K CLASSIFY all -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 MARK match 0x1/0xff CLASSIFY set 1:11 0 0 CLASSIFY all -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 MARK match 0x2/0xff CLASSIFY set 1:12 0 0 CLASSIFY all -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 MARK match 0x3/0xff CLASSIFY set 1:13 0 0 CLASSIFY all -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 MARK match 0x4/0xff CLASSIFY set 1:14

Chain tcpre (1 references)
pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 2159 180K MARK icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 8 MARK set 0x2 565 47460 MARK icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 0 MARK set 0x2 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:20 MARK set 0x3 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:21 MARK set 0x3 410 16768 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 MARK set 0x3
l

Does this look more reasonable?

I have attached an update status.txt

Thanks for the help.

Jim

Tom Eastep wrote:
Jim Duda wrote:
David,

When I do shorewall show ipmangle, I see that packets are getting marked with "1", however, should I expect a non zero pkt number in the CLASSIFY section?

Chain tcout (1 references)
pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 456 100K MARK udp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:4569 MARK set 0x1 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:4569 MARK set 0x1 15 8202 MARK udp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:5060 MARK set 0x1 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:5060 MARK set 0x1 27 2268 MARK icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 8 MARK set 0x2 12 912 MARK icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 0 MARK set 0x2 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:20 MARK set 0x3 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:21 MARK set 0x3 0 0 MARK tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 MARK set 0x3 510 112K MARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 MARK match !0x0/0xffff MARK set 0x4

The last rule is nonsensical. It says that if you have set the mark to any
non-zero value (1-3) then set it to 4!!!! So all of your outgoing packets
have either mark=0 or mark=4. That's what your CLASSIFY rules are telling
you also.

I think you wanted '0' in the MATCH column rather than '!0'.

-Tom


------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV


Attachment: status.txt.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users

Reply via email to