Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/7 v2]IPv6:netfilter: defragment

From: Pascal Hambourg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:38:57 +0100

Hello,

Jozsef Kadlecsik a écrit :
> 
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> 
>>> In this case without conntrack, IPv6 would send an ICMPv6 message,
>>> so in my opinion the transparent thing to do would be to still send
>>> them. Of course only if reassembly is done on an end host.
>> Well, no.  conntrack should just forward even uncompleted fragments
>> to next process (e.g. core ipv6 code), and then the core would send
>> ICMP error back.  ICMP should be sent by the core ipv6 code according
>> to decision of itself, not according to netfilter.
> 
> But what state could be associated by conntrack to the uncompleted 
> fragments but the INVALID state? In consequence, in any sane setup, the 
> uncompleted fragments will be dropped silently by a filter table rule
> and no ICMP error message will be sent back.

AFAIK, in the IPv4 stack the reassembly takes place before the INPUT
chains (NF_IP_LOCAL_IN hook). Is it different in the IPv6 stack ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to [email-masked]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html