similar to: [Bug 80] Not detected packets?

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80 ------- Additional Comments From ral928@wish.nl 2003-05-24 00:45 ------- Yes I am. It seems that this is NOT a bug. The answer to the outgoing packet, with a private destination ip, is send using a none-private ip. That's why it isnt detected. I thing that the status/resolution can be changed to closed I guess.

Hi, I have a fedora15 x86_64 host with one fedora15 guest running amavis+spamassassin+postfix and performance is horrible. The host is a quad-core E13240 with 16GB and 3 1TB Seagate ST31000524NS and all partitions are ext4. I've allocated 4 processors and 8GB of RAM to this guest. I really hoped someone could help me identify areas in which performance can be improved at both the guest and

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47 ------- Additional Comments From dg@ezcom.de 2003-06-30 16:17 ------- today i replaced my 8139too with a 3c59x and the corruptions are gone ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40 laforge@netfilter.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2003-02-03 16:49 ------- We haven't seen this

http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=680 Willie <MidSpeck at hotmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |MidSpeck at hotmail.com --- Comment #8 from Willie <MidSpeck at hotmail.com> 2011-12-16 21:29:19 --- I

Hi all, i have a xen 4.3 installation and would like to have a bridge bond szenario: *** eth0 eth1 | | bond0 | br0 | vif = [ ''bridge=br0,mac=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx'' ] *** With the network script in debian wheezy *** /etc/network/interfaces auto bond0 iface bond0 inet manual slaves eth0 eth1

I have a CentOS 4 server that acts as a gateway for a small LAN. The lower half of the 192.168.144 address space is the LAN on eth1, the upper half is the WAN on eth0, and the default route is to 192.168.144.254 which is my DSL router; this has been working fine for years. However, it's recently become convenient to connect the server to a VPN from time to time, for which I've set up

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34 laforge@netfilter.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |2 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=439 laforge@netfilter.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2006-02-11 10:31 MET ------- We generally don't

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47 ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2003-02-14 09:14 ------- did you load iptable_nat at the time the problem with wrong-destip does happen? ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

Actually, here is what shows up in the log, regardless of whether the driver is built-in or loaded as a module: Feb 5 10:16:15 sparenode1 sysctl: net.ipv4.conf.default.rp_filter = 1 Feb 5 10:16:15 sparenode1 sysctl: net.ipv4.conf.default.accept_source_route = 0 Feb 5 10:16:15 sparenode1 sysctl: kernel.sysrq = 0 Feb 5 10:16:15 sparenode1 sysctl: kernel.core_uses_pid = 1 Feb 5 10:16:15 sparenode1

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104 ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2003-06-22 20:46 ------- Could you please try to strace your iptables and see if there is some error during the gesockopt/setsockopt system call when the erroneous counter values are returned? Thanks. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=404 ------- Additional Comments From dave@rem.homeip.net 2006-02-03 20:29 MET ------- Created an attachment (id=205) --> (https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=205&action=view) Description of "stuck packets", observations Still don't know WHY packets get stuck... -- Configure bugmail:

Currently I have shorewal 2.2 installed om my debian 2.6.8 kernel. The firewall machine can access the internet via a ethernet modem fine. The firewall can ping the local network. The local network can ping the firewall server, see the samba files. Howeven teh local network cannot access the internet through the firewall Any suggestions? Rob van Overbruggen Settings and stats: Server: Eth1 :

(Sorry, my previous post was sent in HTML format) I am having a hell of a time with shorewall... I have a Dlink DCM202 Cable modem with the Ethernet connected directly to eth0 on the linux box. Then I have a second nic on the linux box connected to a hub for the internal network. I am trying to allow traffic from the internet connect to my FTP and WEB servers on my Winbloze box on the lan.

Routing Problem Internet | | DSL Router with NAT Enabled 192.168.93.2/24 | | | | 192.168.93.1/24 (eth1) | Linux Multihomed Router -- 10.0.0.25/8 (eth0) ------------------10.0.0.1 (host) | | 192.168.10.2/24 (eth2)

Hi all: I have some kvm host(rhel 6.4, 2.6.32-358.0.1.el6.x86_64), I ran several windows guest on it(more than 10 guest on one host and the guest os are win7-32/win7-64/win2k8), but the guest network kept down automatically, lost package. I tried virtio drive and e1000 drive,but it didn't work. However, when I run cmd.exe ping some other subnet ip it worked. The host and guest are connected by

Hi, I''m having issues with policing my incoming traffic by matching packet marks made by iptables. I''ve checked as many sites and guides as I can find, and I seem to be doing the exact same thing as they all are, but there''s still no success. As such, I was wondering if anyone can have a quick look to see if I''ve done anything obviously stupid? Essentially, I

(anonymous post) I have a simple 2 interface firewall setup and all is good, almost. I am hosting virtual websites and DNS behind shorewall no problem. However I am trying to use SFTP via a different port number and have no luck even though Putty works well. Is there anything weird to sftp and shorewall? My lab uses a different firewall (firestarter) and it works OK. I am using; DNAT net

Hi; I sucesyfully ran AD on samba4 software. All required by me functions works properly but when I turn on firewall my enviroment is getting very slow - logon process is 3 times longer then on system with disabled firewall service. Below I pasted my firewall configuration - I based on samba tutorial and aexples and official microsoft web page with needed ports: Have you similar problems after