Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
SA
just joined
Topic Author
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 12:03 am

stateless fragment processing

Tue Jul 10, 2007 1:36 pm

I have 2 vlan interfaces (tag 101 and 102) and "accept all" rule in the forward chain.
Fragmented UDP packets are dropped and there is no way to match them (only the first fragment is matched with size=1500).
If I enable connection tracking the packets get forwarded and i see their "full" size (>1500).
Seems like a bug to me, i have no need in statefull firewall and there is no reason to drop transit fragments (unless, of course, there is a specific rule).

MT 2.9.44
 
changeip
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3833
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 5:22 pm

Re: stateless fragment processing

Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:18 pm

do you log these drops, or just see they don't pass by using packet sniffer ? Without connection-tracking it should just pass anything I would assume.
 
SA
just joined
Topic Author
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 12:03 am

Re: stateless fragment processing

Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:56 pm

So would I.
But no, fragments are silently dropped by routeros with tracking disabled, not seen in mangle nor in filter chains at all.
 
changeip
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3833
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 5:22 pm

Re: stateless fragment processing

Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:51 pm

http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... nts#p63884

I would think with conntrack off you should at least be able to route the fragments... however if you have any firewall rules it seems to not. Not quite sure really, seems odd to me. Maybe you can add a rule to allow fragments, I think I saw that as a filter option in the firewall at one time or another.

Sam
 
SA
just joined
Topic Author
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 12:03 am

Re: stateless fragment processing

Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:45 pm

Thanks, seems like the same problem (but I have no bridge). Still seems more like bug, if there is no way to match a fragment (ROS drops if tracking disabled, matches whole reassembled packet if tracking enabled) then why there are specific options for that in firewall?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: zuna80 and 97 guests