On 05/10/2012 08:22 AM, Stephane Chazelas wrote: > 2012-05-10 06:43:18 -0700, Tom Eastep: >> On 05/10/2012 05:59 AM, Stephane Chazelas wrote: >> >>> >>> There's still one bit I'm not clear on: >>> >>> Shorewall clears the marks in mangle/FORWARD (FORWARD_CLEAR_MARK >>> setting), and according to >>> http://www.faqs.org/docs/iptables/traversingoftables.html#TABLE.FORWARDEDPACKETS >>> this happens *before* filter/FORWARD, so my rule in "rules" >>> shouldn't match. But still it does, otherwise it wouldn't work >>> at all. Anybody has any insight on that? (I'm on Linux 2.6.32). >>> >> >> FORWARD_CLEAR_MARK only clears the routing part of the mark. So if you >> have HIGH_ROUTE_MARKS=Yes (PROVIDER_OFFSET> 0 in later Shorewall >> versions), then the low-order bit will not be cleared. > [...] > > Thanks, > > but I do see: > > *mangle > [...] > -A FORWARD -j MARK --set-xmark 0x0/0xff > -A FORWARD -j tcfor > [...] > > in iptables-save output, so that would mean clearing lower marks. > > # grep HIGH shorewall.conf > HIGH_ROUTE_MARKS=No > > And yet, it still works.
I can't comment further without seeing the output of 'shorewall dump'. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who Shoreline, \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like Washington, USA \ all of the passengers in his car http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Shorewall-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
