From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 14 16:56:37 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0E1716A4CE for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:56:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D062F43D39 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:56:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 28526 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2004 16:45:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freebsd.org) ([62.48.0.53]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 14 Dec 2004 16:45:27 -0000 Message-ID: <41BF1B44.E3C1453E@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:56:36 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vova@fbsd.ru References: <20041213124051.GB32719@cell.sick.ru> <200412131743.36722.max@love2party.net> <20041213104200.A62152@xorpc.icir.org> <1103017203.1060.25.camel@localhost> <1103035345.1060.55.camel@localhost> <41BF008D.AD79C9B@freebsd.org> <1103040032.1060.72.camel@localhost> <1103042558.1060.82.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit cc: Luigi Rizzo cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: per-interface packet filters X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:56:38 -0000 Vladimir Grebenschikov wrote: > > В вт, 14/12/2004 в 17:13 +0100, Andre Oppermann пишет: > > > > Yes, but is about "how netgraph interfere with ipfw" sometimes, netgraph > > > filtering has nothing common with host filtering. > > > > Nontheless you need to call it from somewhere? > > Yes, If, for example, I do connection of two VPNs without accessiong > them into host packet flow and want to firewall something inside. Hence you need a ng_ipfw node to plug in between. Should be easy for Gleb to write one. > > > > > 2. Plug firewall on any specific interface > > > > > 3. Plug firewall on any network packet processing input/output (current) > > > > > 4. Plug it into bridging code > > > > > > > > How do you represent this complexity in syntax and semantics? > > > > > > First what jump into my mind: > > > > > > flows management: > > > ipfw flow add $customer1 iface fxp0 > > > ipfw flow del $customer2 iface fxp0 > > > ipfw flow set $customer1 iface fxp1 > > > ipfw flow default $extrenal > > > ipfw flow list > > > > > > changes rules for flow > > > ipfw flow use $customer1 add ip from any to any > > > ... > > > > Ok, this is a start. Now we are getting somewhere. > > > > A "flow" would be what Gleb calls a "chain"? > > Yes, exactly, just read Gleb's message. > > > > or as variant > > > ipfw -F $customer1 add ip from any to any > > > ... > > > > > > I think there can be better interface if think a bit about it. > > > > Great. Please do so. > > Probably better way to do > > ipfw flow set $custome1 add iface fxp0 del iface fxp1 ... etc > for attaching multiple interfaces to single flow (or chain, does not > matter) > > also > > ipfw flow add $dummy - to add not connected flow > and > ipfw flow default $dummy to make this flow system-default (instead of > old) Ok, I see. Do you mind changing the term "flow" to something else? Because by most accounts a flow is commonly a tcp session for example in Netflow accounting. It would be very confusing to use it here with a total different meaning. > Ok, I do not want to deep into details until I'll look code, but I guess > it is possible to extend PFIL_HOOKS API without harming existing > applications. It is not required to change PFIL_HOOKS in any way. Everything we need is already in there. See Luigi's later emails as well. It just requires a slightly different implementation approach. -- Andre