| To: | NetFilter <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Shouldn't this rule catch all packets |
| From: | jwlargent <jwlargent@vlsmaps.com> |
| Date: | Thu, 14 Dec 2006 13:16:01 -0600 |
| Delivered-to: | sp-com-lists@consult.net |
| Delivered-to: | netfilter-list1@securepoint.com |
| List-archive: | </pipermail/netfilter> |
| List-help: | <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=help> |
| List-id: | General discussion and user questions <netfilter.lists.netfilter.org> |
| List-post: | <mailto:netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> |
| List-subscribe: | <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>, <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>, <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| Sender: | netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061025) |
I was trying to debug some errors in my iptables setup so I added the
following rules to my OUTPUT, just to see what packets were going out.
iptables -A OUTPUT -m state --state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPTWhen I do iptables -L OUTPUT -v it shows some packets are falling through to the last rule. Shouldn't the first rule catch all the packets? Jeff |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: Install questions, Sietse van Zanen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Shouldn't this rule catch all packets, Petr Pisar |
| Previous by Thread: | ipq_set_verdict(), Luca Bedogni |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Shouldn't this rule catch all packets, Petr Pisar |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |