On 04/29/2013 07:25 PM, Dash Four wrote:
> 
> 
> Dash Four wrote:
>>
>> Tom Eastep wrote:
>>> On 04/27/2013 01:26 PM, Dash Four wrote:
>>>  
>>>> On one of my dmz machines I need to define a separate provider, 
>>>> which holds a set of routes to/from the (public) internet, as well 
>>>> as 3 of my internal networks (all arriving or originating on the 
>>>> same interface).
>>>>
>>>> As I have TC_EXPERT=No, as well as TRACK_PROVIDERS=No and 
>>>> USE_DEFAULT_RT=No, what would be the appropriate option to use for 
>>>> this provider: "track", "notrack", or neither? The man page doesn't 
>>>> tell me much (either that, or I am getting a bit goofy today), so I 
>>>> need to canvass an opinion. Thanks.
>>>>     
>>>
>>> The 'track' option affects connection marking when incoming packets are
>>> received. When a packet is received on a 'track' provider and the packet
>>> either creates a new connection or is part of a connection with no
>>> connection mark, then the connection is marked with the provider's mark
>>> value. This causes all subsequent packets for that connection (in and
>>> out) to bypass the PREROUTING mangle rules (since you have TC_EXPERT=No)
>>> and simply use the connection mark's value for routing (in the absence
>>> of a relevant routing rule). In general, 'track' is the safe and
>>> efficient choice for a provider that has a configured mark value.
>>>   
>> Right, thanks Tom. If I use this provider for connections which do 
>> have a nat (from the top of my head, I do have at least 3 types of 
>> connections which get MASQUERADEd), should I then use the 'track' or 
>> not, given that all these connections have statements in rtrules to 
>> direct to my provider table, based on their final destinations. To 
>> give you a brief example of this:
>>
>> in eth1->masquerade->eth0 out (the "provider" interface). My rtrules 
>> are with priorities 26000+ and are based on the destinations (subnet 
>> addresses) of these masqueraded connections. In addition, the dmz host 
>> (which has both eth0 and eth1 interfaces on it) also initiates such 
>> connections, but they start directly on the eth0 interface.
> Any help with this?

Just set 'track'.

-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 \________________________________________________

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET
Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost.
Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead
Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users

Reply via email to