On Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 01:55:33AM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I was thinking, does the packet logging exposes already the > > net->ns.inum? IIUC the goal is to find what netns is dropping what > > packet and the reason for the packet drop, not only in this case but > > in every case, to ease finding the needle in the stack. If so, then it > > probably makes sense to consolidate this around nf_log() > > infrastructure. > > No, it doesn't. It also depends on the backend: > for syslog, nothing will be logged unless nf_log_all_netns sysctl is > enabled. > > For nflog, it is logged, to the relevant namespaces ulogd, or not in > case that netns doesn't have ulogd running. > > For syslog one could extend nf_log_dump_packet_common() but I'm not sure > how forgiving existing log parsers are when this gets additional > field. > > Also, would (in case we use this for the "table full" condition), should > this log unconditionally or does it need a new sysctl? > > Does it need auto-ratelimit (probably yes, its called during packet > flood so we dont want to flood syslog/ulog)? Yes, such extension would need to answer these questions. > > Anyway, maybe I'm overdoing, I'll be fine with this approach if you > > consider it good enough to improve the situation. > > I think its better than current state of affairs since it at least > allows to figure out which netns is experiencing this. Thanks for explaining, let's take this patch as is then.
