From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed May 27 11:20:57 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4DB32F70B for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 11:20:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from hz.grosbein.net (hz.grosbein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:c2c:26d8::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hz.grosbein.net", Issuer "hz.grosbein.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49X7gD3kdjz4BQD for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 11:20:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (eg.sd.rdtc.ru [IPv6:2a03:3100:c:13:0:0:0:5]) by hz.grosbein.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 04RBKfs4087890 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 May 2020 11:20:42 GMT (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) X-Envelope-From: eugen@grosbein.net X-Envelope-To: tom.marcoen@gmail.com Received: from [10.58.0.10] (dadv@dadvw [10.58.0.10]) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 04RBKeKY006137 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 May 2020 18:20:40 +0700 (+07) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Subject: Re: On Netgraph To: Tom Marcoen , freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: From: Eugene Grosbein Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 18:20:29 +0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOCAL_FROM, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -2.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record * 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record * 2.6 LOCAL_FROM From my domains X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on hz.grosbein.net X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49X7gD3kdjz4BQD X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=permerror (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of eugen@grosbein.net uses mechanism not recognized by this client) smtp.mailfrom=eugen@grosbein.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.71 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.50)[-0.498]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[grosbein.net]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.03)[0.027]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_PERMFAIL(0.00)[empty SPF record]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.14)[-0.138]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com,freebsd.org]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:2a01:4f8::/29, country:DE]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 11:20:57 -0000 27.05.2020 15:06, Tom Marcoen wrote: > Hey all, > > I'm new to this mailing list and also quite new to FreeBSD (huray, welcome > to me!) so bare with me, please. > > I'm reading up on Netgraph on how I can integrate it with FreeBSD jails and > I was looking at some of the examples provided in > /usr/share/examples/netgraph and now have the following question. > The udp.tunnel example shows an iface point-to-point connection but it is > unencrypted. Of course I could encrypt it with an IPsec tunnel on the host > or tunnel it through SSH, but I was wondering whether there exists a nice > Netgraph solution, e.g. a node with two hooks, receiving unencrypted > traffic on the inside hook and sending out encrypted traffic on the outside > hook. There is ng_mppc(4) netgraph node capable to perform relatively weak MPPE encryption (and/or compression) but it is designed to work with ng_ppp(4) node encapsulating IP packets into PPP frames. I doubt it's very efficient for inter-jail traffic. Why do you need encryption for inter-jails traffic in first place? Encryption is needed for traffic passing untrusted channels where data interception is possible but inter-jail traffic does not leave the kernel at all until it hits destination jail.