LVS
lvs-devel
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: add sysctl to ignore tunneled packets

To: Alex Gartrell <agartrell@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipvs-next] ipvs: add sysctl to ignore tunneled packets
Cc: horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kernel-team@xxxxxx
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 22:24:12 +0300 (EEST)
        Hello,

On Thu, 10 Sep 2015, Alex Gartrell wrote:

> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c
> index 99be680..984cf49 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c
> @@ -1760,8 +1760,16 @@ ip_vs_in(unsigned int hooknum, struct sk_buff *skb, 
> int af)
>  
>       /* Protocol supported? */
>       pd = ip_vs_proto_data_get(net, iph.protocol);
> -     if (unlikely(!pd))
> +     if (unlikely(!pd)) {
> +             /* The only way we'll see this packet again is if it's
> +              * encapsulated, so mark it with ipvs_property=1 so we
> +              * skip it if we're ignoring tunneled packets
> +              */
> +             if (sysctl_ignore_tunneled(net_ipvs(net)))

        We can use "ipvs" here. I remember people used
matching by src MAC to solve such problem for DR. For TUN
fwmark or match by input device can work too. In all cases,
a fwmark-based service is needed...

> +                     skb->ipvs_property = 1;
> +
>               return NF_ACCEPT;
> +     }

Regards

--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>