similar to: [Bug 1086] New: Nftables matching packet header fields and unexpected '(': wrong wiki info or bug?

On 30/06/16 23:19, Mike wrote: > Ned, > > Thank you very much for the response. > Great example following through on the premise. > It sounds like I need to have a better understanding of the traffic > patterns on my network to know the optimal order for iptables > filtering rules. > Try running: iptables -nv -L which will show you in the left hand column a counter for

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1450 Bug ID: 1450 Summary: Using certain simple set combinations with TCP flags causes error in mergesort.c from nft list ruleset Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: arm OS: Ubuntu Status: NEW Severity: normal

Ned, Thank you very much for the response. Great example following through on the premise. It sounds like I need to have a better understanding of the traffic patterns on my network to know the optimal order for iptables filtering rules. My brief example - Premise: I want to limit outsiders from interfering with LAN client machines. So, I have the following rules regarding forwarding traffic:

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=870 Summary: Iptables cannot block outbound packets sent by Nessus Product: iptables Version: 1.4.x Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Ubuntu Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: iptables AssignedTo: netfilter-buglog at lists.netfilter.org

Since I'm not sure, if my previous mail was sent correctly, here I'm trying it again. Peter -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: Re: [Samba] Build 3.2.3a on RedHat 7.2 Datum: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 17:17:56 +0100 Von: Peter H?bschen <pehu@wiwi.uni-sb.de> An: Casper Pedersen <cp@c-note.dk> CC: "samba@lists.samba.org" <samba@lists.samba.org> Referenzen:

Hi, system info: ubuntu 7.04 (Host OS) samba 3.0.24 (installed with apt-get) vmware-server 6.0.1 windows XP (Guest OS) I was using the iptables script provided by iptablesrocks.org. It's been quite useful, but I ran into a problem when I tried to connect samba. Without any iptables rules, I have no problem when connecting host os(ubuntu samba server) from guest os Windows XP. I referenced

Hi! I am trying to use hping to chek the latency of our network. Somehow things are not going to plan and I thought someone might be able to shed some light on the subject. Here is the setup: (the IP addresses gvien here are fake, but they do represent the correct state of the networking setup) vlan interface IP mask V2 eth0 192.168.20.20 32

On 05/16/2015 10:23 AM, Leon Fauster wrote: > Well, the destination is not in my realm (different provider). Before > contacting them I want to be sure that my system is not causing this. > So far i just see a "tcp retransmission" while trying to establish > a https connection (captured on our router): That can be difficult to establish. If you're getting no response,

It's a shell script #!/bin/bash IPTABLES="/sbin/iptables" # Load required modules /sbin/insmod ip_tables /sbin/insmod ip_conntrack /sbin/insmod iptable_nat /sbin/insmod ipt_MASQUERADE # Then flush all rules /sbin/iptables -F /sbin/iptables -t nat -F /sbin/iptables -P INPUT DROP /sbin/iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT # In the NAT table (-t nat), Append

Right, time to (as someone said) put this thread to a proper rest. Some of you have probably read my VPN/Routing/Lost packages hassles in the last week, well, here is the rundown. Look at http://statler.mupp.net/shorewall/Layout.jpg Basically. The shorewall knows the route to the .224.0/24 net is through .221.221. The systems in .221.0/24 has the FW as their default gw. The FW could reach

I am currently using samba 2.3a-12.3 as a PDC, here is my smb.conf [global] netbios name = kidpaddle workgroup = JUDO domain master = yes local master = yes preferred master = yes os level = 255 wins support = yes time server = yes security = user encrypt passwords = yes domain logons = yes domain admin group = root davidj logon drive = H: logon

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1370 Bug ID: 1370 Summary: iptables-restore-translate Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: nft Assignee: pablo at netfilter.org Reporter:

Hi! The Netfilter project proudly presents: nftables 0.7 This release contains many accumulated bug fixes and new features available up to the (upcoming) Linux 4.10-rc1 kernel release. * Facilitate migration from iptables to nftables: At compilation time, you have to pass this option. # ./configure --with-xtables And libxtables needs to be installed in your system. This allows

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1469 Bug ID: 1469 Summary: Bison reported unused tokens in `nft` Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: trivial Priority: P5 Component: nft Assignee: pablo at netfilter.org

http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=693 --- Comment #5 from www at applejelly.org 2011-12-05 01:26:07 --- Created an attachment (id=370) --> (http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/attachment.cgi?id=370) A test case SNAT fails to maquerade some TCP CWR, TCP ECN, TCP URG, TCP ACK, and TCP PSH packets -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email -------

I have just seen this, that I thought was an old problem, show up again.. I noticed it when I let a domU stay on DHCP long enough to try to do a renew, then the DHCP server started logging about checksum errors: dhcpd: 5 bad udp checksums in 5 packets DHCP server is 1:9.6.ESV.R4+dfsg-0+lenny1 so newer DHCP releases may contain workaorunds allowing these packets.. Since I had this problem years

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=876 Summary: bizarre handling of "related" connection packets (wrong OUTPUT interface assigned) Product: netfilter/iptables Version: unspecified Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Fedora Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5

Well I am about to reserve a small padded room so I can bounce off the walls without inflicting tooo much damage... Nothing is making sense at this point. I tried several releases last night before settling on the latest CVS (seemed to work the best). Asterisk was running GREAT for the first few hours. Now since around 10AM EST SIP can't register and incoming calls are rejected with "all

Hi all, could someone tell me what this does mean "bad file descriptor" when trying to start asterisk. It goes till the CLI command and then die with this message. Below an strace output from asterisk -vvvvvvvvvc It's on debian Sarge kernel 2.6.7 with packages from debian VoIP team. The server was running fine till now with this version. Thanks

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:1086 Moderate Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1086.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: 3d5b6fc52faf244fd920acdeefd625109a512221b9244567f9c51a3df5360ca3 libndp-1.2-6.el7_2.i686.rpm