similar to: [Bug 47] conntrack breaks nfs, corrupted packets

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.

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47 ------- Additional Comments From kaber@trash.net 2003-05-14 02:39 ------- I've captured some non-fragmented tcp packets which show this behaviour with 2.4.21-rc2. They look badly damaged. The destination ip doesn't match the mac but they come from valid connections. Setting interface mtu to 1486 helps which makes me

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91 ------- Additional Comments From kaber@trash.net 2003-06-16 00:38 ------- problem seems to be a dropped reference in remove_expectations, can be reproduced by unloading ip_conntrack after unloading a helper which is helping a connection. Attached patch fixes my problems. ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64 laforge@netfilter.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2003-03-16 09:36 ------- you seem to be running a

http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=610 Summary: conntrack doesn't work Product: netfilter/iptables Version: linux-2.6.x Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P1 Component: unknown AssignedTo: laforge at netfilter.org ReportedBy: urykhy at

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91 mschwendt@users.sf.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | ------- Additional Comments From mschwendt@users.sf.net

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=448 laforge@netfilter.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|ip_conntrack |nf_conntrack ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2006-02-14 09:05 MET ------- ipv6 conntrack is

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=517 ------- Additional Comments From netfilter@linuxace.com 2006-09-26 03:44 MET ------- *** Bug 519 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=498 cfilin@intermedia.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chip@innovates.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91 netfilter@linuxace.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |netfilter@linuxace.com ------- Additional Comments From netfilter@linuxace.com 2005-02-24 02:10 MET ------- Any recent

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=508 ------- Additional Comments From kaber@trash.net 2006-09-14 13:18 MET ------- Did you enable nf_conntrack and the ipv6 connection tracking module? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You reported the bug, or are watching the

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48 ------- Additional Comments From tatonet@tiscali.it 2004-02-25 15:05 ------- I know that this is an old bug report, but it's still opened... If we save the size of each single fragment we have to face another problem: how should we re-fragment the packet if original fragments were partially or totally overlapped?

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48 laforge@netfilter.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2003-02-14 09:02 ------- This is a really hard

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64 ------- Additional Comments From tobias@portfolio16.de 2003-04-21 23:51 ------- Hi, I think I just found a problem with the patch... It was my fault to use a automatic build system and not check it... In the end the patch didn't apply in its whole and I didn't discover it, because the build system just went on.

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=522 ------- Additional Comments From kaber@trash.net 2006-10-13 07:47 MET ------- Please add a dump of the packet in question from both sides of the firewall and the corresponding /proc/net/ip_conntrack entry. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=467 ------- Additional Comments From mvolaski@aecom.yu.edu 2006-04-14 01:35 MET ------- Examples of rules that give the error are 1) iptables -A INPUT -i bond0 -s 129.98.90.0/24 -p tcp --dport 548 -j ACCEPT 2) iptables -A INPUT -i bond0 -s 129.98.90.101/32 -p tcp --dport 497 -j ACCEPT 3) iptables -A INPUT -i bond0 -s 129.98.90.227/32

http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=612 Summary: conntrack returns src, dst, dport and sport all zeroed Product: libnfnetlink Version: unspecified Platform: i386 OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P1 Component: libnfnetlink AssignedTo: laforge at netfilter.org

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59 laforge@netfilter.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68 ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2003-03-20 10:55 ------- This looks strange. The BUG in slab.c tells us that there is a GFP_ATOMIC missing. This means that we are allocating kernel memory from softirq context with only GFP_KERNEL. If I understand your backtrace correctly, what happens is: - you are

Hello I''ve setuped a bridge with l7-filter and ipp2p. We have every day + or - between 10Mbits and 30 Mbits P2P traffic from + or - 450 customers. When traffic increase. I''ve got this kind of error message : Feb 23 14:26:19 gestor1 kernel: printk: 38 messages suppressed. Feb 23 14:26:19 gestor1 kernel: ip_conntrack: table full, dropping packet. The server is celeron