PGSQL x iptables

From: "Slansky Lukas" <Lukas(dot)Slansky(at)upce(dot)cz>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: PGSQL x iptables
Date: 2009-05-06 07:26:40
Message-ID: 7F27BA389269BB47A79525510325A35F6F923A@se02.upce.cz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hello,

we're using PG and Application Server (JBoss) on separate CentOS servers
with Cisco PIX in between. On DB side is iptable with following relevant
rules:

1. -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT

2. -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp -s
aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd --dport 5432 -j ACCEPT

3. -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited

I was wondering when these rules are not OK for our environment. It
seems that rules 1 and 2 sometimes pass packets and therefore these
packets are rejected. Such connection is then in some weird state,
doesn't communicate (obviously - packets are dropped) and psql (or
JBoss) connection is blocking for a long time (at least few hours).

Everything seems to be OK when I have changed rule 2 to "-A
RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m tcp -p tcp -s aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd --dport 5432 -j
ACCEPT".

I'm really confused - what other states are possible for iptables except
ESTABLISHED, RELATED or NEW? In iptables manpage is only INVALID, but
why is this state emerging?

Any idea?

Lukas

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John R Pierce 2009-05-06 07:41:29 Re: PGSQL x iptables
Previous Message Greg Smith 2009-05-06 06:59:01 Re: bizgres