Bug 83991
Summary: | iptables chains wrong/missing | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Public Beta | Reporter: | Miloslav Trmac <mitr> |
Component: | rhl-rg | Assignee: | Johnray Fuller <jrfuller> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Tammy Fox <tammy.c.fox> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | phoebe | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2003-02-12 17:34:47 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Miloslav Trmac
2003-02-10 19:06:07 UTC
There isn't a Packet Filtering section in the CG. Perhaps you meant the RG. True, I got my notes wrong. Sorry about that. Thanks for the feedback. I am confused, however, by what you mean by "There are two HTML pages (chapters?) dealing with 'filter' table and the chains INPUT, FORWARD, OUTPUT. The second one gets it right, the first one doesn't Can you give me page numbers or section headings? "INPUT and OUTPUT are only for connections involving the local machine as an endpoint; OUTPUT doesn't include packet received and then forwarded." What I have is: *INPUT â Applies to packets received via a network interface. ---> So I figured this implied it was an endpoint. I can be more specific. *OUTPUT â Applies to packets sent out via the same network interface which received the packets. ----> I will change this to something more in line w/ the man page: "for locally-generated packets" is what it states As for the MANGLE tables. There are 3 new chains. INPUT (for packets coming into the box itself), FORWARD (for altering packets being routed through the box), and POSTROUTING (for altering packets as they are about to go out) I almost missed that! Thanks for the catches. I will fix the chapter STAT. I dropped the chapter early in the release cycle, so this may explain the mangling of the MANGLE table :-) Johnray Here is the updated text. Does this address all the issues you have raised? Let me know ASAP as this chapter is final within 48 hours. Johnray -------------------- -BEGIN UPDATED TEXT- -------------------- Each of these tables in turn have a group of built-in chains which correspond to the actions performed on the packet by the netfilter. The built-in chains for the filter table are as follows: * INPUT â Applies to network packets that are targeted for the host. * OUTPUT â Applies to locally-generated network packets. * FORWARD â Applies to network packets routed through the host. The built-in chains for the nat table are as follows: * PREROUTING â Alters network packets when they arrive. * OUTPUT â Alters locally-generated network packets before they are sent out. * POSTROUTING â Alters network packets before they are sent out. The built-in chains for the mangle table are as follows: * INPUT â Alters network packets targeted for the host. * OUTPUT â Alters locally-generated network packets before they are sent out. * FORWARD â Alters network packets routed through the host. * PREROUTING â Alters incoming network packets before they are routed. * POSTROUTING â Alters network packets before they are sent out. Every network packet received by or sent out of a Linux system is subject to at least one table. ------------------ -END UPDATED TEXT- ------------------ I am confused, however, by what you mean by "There are two HTML pages (chapters?) dealing with 'filter' table and the chains INPUT, FORWARD, OUTPUT. The second one gets it right, the first one doesn't Can you give me page numbers or section headings? My bad: "Chapter 14. iptables" - the one you have just corrected "Differences between iptables and ipchains" has had OUTPUT right. Anyway, the updated text looks fine to me. Thanks! K, I'm closing this one then. Thanks! Johnray |