similar to: Is iptables -j CONNMARK not available in CentOS4??

Hi All Take a look and please tell what is wrong: root@prensa:~# $IPT -t mangle -F PREROUTING root@prensa:~# $IPT -t mangle -A PREROUTING -j CONNMARK --restore-mark iptables: No chain/target/match by that name root@prensa:~# $IPT -t mangle -A PREROUTING -j CONNMARK iptables v1.3.4: CONNMARK target: No operation specified Try `iptables -h'' or

Hi all, I have 2 ISPs on a Linux router and a local network with one Linux server and many windows. The local network is masqueraded. I want to give access to port 25 and 80 of my server from any incoming request (i.e. from my 2 ISP). I have made a DNAT translation, witch work but the outgoing answers are not routed correctly. Of course, the de-SNAT process is done before the routing process. So

Hello everybody. i have the folowing problem: i have this in the top of PREROUTING chain in mangle table iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -j CONNMARK --set-mark 0 # rule 1 iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -m connmark --mark 5 # rule 2 iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -m connmark --mark 6 # rule 3 i think when packet is passing trough my POSTROUTING in mangle table

I am trying to get IPP2P working on my router. Thus far I can see connections being marked (see below), but they don''t seem to get saved or something. When looking at /proc/net/ip_conntrack, nothing has anything other than 0 for mark. The iptables commands for this are: iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -j CONNMARK --restore-mark iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -m mark ! --mark 0 -j

Hi, I want to classify with ipp2p packets that I''ve captured with tcpdump. I send the packets with tcpreply. I had to create a bridge interface in order to enable the listening interface in promiscous mode and to classify the traffic mirrored to that. In this mode the traffic pass through the prerouting chain of the mangle table (on bridge). I want to used connmark for recognized flows,

Hi Here is a short description of my network: ppp0 (adsl) ppp1 (adsl) | | | | --------------------- | Router | | Firewall | | MASQUERAD | | DNAT | | | | eth0 | --------------------- | | | ---------------------- |

Hi, I''ve been implementing a load balancing solution using CONNMARK, based on solution described by Luciano Ruete at [1]. Gracias por el post y por apuntar en la dirección correcta Luciano! Once implemented, I''ve found that due to some reason packets aren''t properly marked (or improperly remarked) and sent out using the wrong interface. My topo setup is:

Hi All, It''s an old problem and still isn''t fixed :( I need the connection marking support to enable the triplet of ISP''s we use. However, I downloaded the latest 2.6.22.1 kernel, made an RPM and installed it. I see the following kernel modules (which looks promising): /lib/modules/2.6.22.1/kernel/net/netfilter xt_connmark.ko xt_CONNMARK.ko Which yields the

Greetings folks, I've been researching the various iptables modules that are included with the stock CentOS4 distro; particularly the connlimit module. Is connlimit included by default? I thought it is since performing # iptables -m connlimit --help returns information on connlimit usage along with the general iptables help info: <SNIP> connlimit v1.2.11 options: [!]

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=524 Summary: packetfence - IPtables-save produces output that iptables-restore cannot parse Product: iptables Version: 1.3.3 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: iptables-save

Hello...I have a Slackware based machine doing routing & QoS for my internal LAN users... It has two interfaces: eth1(100mbps) that connects to the aDSL modem(USR 9105) and eth0(100mbps) that connects to my local LAN... I''am using shorewall as a firewall...i think it''s configured well as it''s working as i want and i pass all the online firewall tests... :D All lan

Sorry for making this a cross-post, but the pressure is on for getting this bandwidth shaper working. I have an interesting dilemma with bi-directional packet classification while doing ACK prioritization. This is an overly simplified summary of my setup: Internet | Eth0 | Router | Eth1 | Intranet A client on the Intranet establishes a flow to a server on the Internet. Packets get

When I start my script: * - Creating classes on br1 for upload control ... * - tc class add dev br1 parent 2:0 classid 2:46 hfsc ls m1 576.0Kbit d 2000ms m2 192.0Kbit ul m2 384Kbit ... [ ok ] * - tc class add dev br1 parent 2:46 classid 2:47 hfsc sc umax 1500b dmax 30ms rate 80Kbit . [ ok ] * - tc class add dev br1 parent 2:46 classid 2:48 hfsc ls m2 152.0Kbit ul m2 152.0Kbit

Ok, earlier I post a message explaining my problem with HTB and layer7 (or ipp2p), about not being able to shape the traffic. Well, actually this is what''s happening, I''m marking the packets (right now, I''m using ipp2p as Klaus adviced me to) with iptables, and my queue rules are made using tcng, I''m using the HTB qdisc, and traffic is going to the HTB class

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

Hello guys, I am still in doubt about this kind of server. So my question is about the "prio" at routing tables like: I have 3 tables in /etc/iproute2/rt_tables: 201 201 202 202 222 222 In table 201 there is the rules about my internet link (frame relay) that comes into eth0. So I made this route into it: [root@ns2 iproute2]# ip route show table 201 default via

hi i recently searched in the mailinglist archive and found similar problems, whose solutions helped very much, thank you. i have the following scenario: a firewall with one lan interface eth0 10.1.1.1/24 and two uplink interfaces eth1 10.2.2.1/24 eth2 10.3.3.1/24 each uplink interface does SNAT: iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -o eth1 -j SNAT --to-source 10.2.2.1 iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING

I saw this snippet from Daniel Chemko dchemko@smgtec.com Mon, 31 May 2004 09:30:43 -0700 # Egress marking (mostly for QOS operations) iptables -t mangle -A POSTROUTING -j CONNMARK --restore-mark iptables -t mangle -A POSTROUTING -m mark ! --mark 0 -j ACCEPT iptables -t mangle -A POSTROUTING -o ${if_inet} --dport 21 -j MARK --set-mark 0x111 iptables -t mangle -A POSTROUTING -j CONNMARK

hello, I try to use layer7 filter to classify packets. I have a proble with http match. This protocol seems to work well with l7-filter (http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/protocols) but for me nothing is filtering in http class. Someone can help me ? Here is my script : #!/bin/bash IPT_BIN=/sbin/iptables TC_BIN=/sbin/tc INTER_OUT=ppp0 LINK_RATE_UP=1000Kbit RATE_ACK=200Kbit RATE_DEFAULT=100Kbit

Hello all, I am having some difficults to make a routing rule work. I want that every P2P packages go to one interface (eth2 - cheaper link) nad the rest of the traffic go to another interface (eth0 - frame relay very expensive). I am using this script to make the mark and balance: ------- #!/bin/bash IPT="/usr/local/sbin/iptables" IP="/sbin/ip" #---- # Declara redes #----