WIP: Add forward tables to handle unsafe network packets distinctly from vpn network packets #1498
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds two additional firewall tables to deal distinctly with packets that have a source or destination address within an unsafe network on either the inbound or outbound.
Packets that have a source address assigned to the sender and a destination address assigned to the receiver will continue to use the
inbound
/outbound
tables.Packets sent to the tun device (outbound):
outbound
tableforward_outbound
tableforward_outbound
tableforward_outbound
tablePackets received by the udp listener (inbound):
inbound
tableforward_inbound
tableforward_inbound
tableforward_inbound
tableQuestions:
firewall.forward_inbound_action
andfirewall.forward_outbound_action
, should they default to their existing counterparts if so?forward
or collapse them into the existinginbound
/outbound
metrics?unsafe_inbound
andunsafe_outbound
would be better names?cidr
rule and alias it toremote_cidr
? Or maybe even better,remote_network
andlocal_network
?