[libvirt] problem with nwfilter and ip6tables

[Stefan Berger]

On 11/21/2011 08:46 AM, Reinier Schoof wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm investigating using the nwfilter-functionality of libvirt to give 
> my clients the possibility to block ports of their VPSes. The same 
> mechanism allows me to restrict the outgoing traffic a VPS is 
> generating. In the end, I want to restrict MAC, IPv4 and IPv6 traffic, 
> while the client can also restrict traffic to UDP and TCP.
>
> All goes well, until I want to restrict the UDP/TCP traffic to certain 
> IPv6 addresses. Where iptables shows the IPv4-restriction I've put up, 
> ip6tables doesn't show anything. In the logs, I only see some 
> ip6tables -D, -X and -F commands failing, which is expected when 
> libvirt tries to delete/flush rules that were never there.
>
> I've built my nwfilter containing the following IPv6-rules, which I 
> for instance reference once for all the TCP-ports which should be open.
>
> <!-- Allow established traffic -->
> <filter name='ipv6-allow-statefull' chain='ipv6'>
> <rule action='accept' direction='in' priority='500'>
> <all state='ESTABLISHED'/>
> </rule>
> <rule action='accept' direction='out' priority='500'>
> <all state='ESTABLISHED,RELATED'/>
> </rule>
> </filter>
>
With the configuration as you have it, can you post the dump of

ip6tables -L -n

?

Can you put the two rules above on priority '100'.
> <!-- Allow TCP in $PORT -->
> <filter name='ipv6-allow-create-state-by-port' chain='ipv6'>
> <rule action='accept' direction='in' priority='500'>
> <tcp state='NEW' dstportstart='$PORT'/>
> </rule>
> <rule action='accept' direction='in' priority='500'>
> <udp state='NEW' dstportstart='$PORT'/>
> </rule>
> </filter>
>
> <!-- Allow IPv6 traffic from $RANGE -->
> <filter name='ipv6-allow-create-state-by-range' chain='ipv6'>
> <rule action='accept' direction='out' priority='500'>
> <ipv6 srcipaddr='$RANGE' srcipmask='64'/>
> </rule>
> </filter>
>
Can you put this one in priority '600'?
> <!-- Drop all other IPv6 traffic -->
> <filter name='ipv6-drop-stateless' chain='ipv6'>
> <rule action='drop' direction='inout' priority='999'>
> <all/>
> </rule>
> </filter>
>
With the above comments 'implemented', does it 'work'?

If not:
- I'd be curious about the content of $RANGE that you're passing in.
- how does the filter look like that ties all the above filters 
together. The order in which the above filters are referenced matters as 
long as you keep the rules at priority '500'.

It should work with ipv6 as well as it does for ipv4, but I must say 
that I don't really test with IPv6 much...

    Stefan

> I use a similar approach for my IPv4 firewall, and it works perfectly. 
> When I use these IPv6 rules, all IPv6 traffic is apparently dropped, 
> but it's hard to debug when the result of this config is abscent in 
> ip6tables.
>
> I'm using these version of software on debian 6.0 squeeze:
> virsh # version
> Compiled against library: libvir 0.9.2
> Using library: libvir 0.9.2
> Using API: QEMU 0.9.2
> Running hypervisor: QEMU 0.15.0
>
> Does anyone have any clues? Thanks in advance!
>
> Regards,
>
> Reinier Schoof
>