Iowa Federation of Labor president Charlie Wishman went further in an email this week. “I expressed my concerns: We’re here to negotiate in good faith, and the company’s bringing armed guards? … It’s intimidation and a lack of respect on the company’s part,” Moore said. Nevertheless, the armed guards immediately set the tone that negotiations might be less than friendly, Moore said. Though Kirkwood Community College and its campus buildings, including Hotel Kirkwood, have a no-firearms policy, a Kirkwood spokesperson said Ingredion’s guards had been approved beforehand as an exception to that policy. Moore said he and 100-G’s negotiating committee, which included an international representative with BCTGM, arrived at Hotel Kirkwood on Tuesday morning and saw company managers and executives accompanied by six security guards with holstered firearms.Īn Ingredion spokesperson said the armed guards were “necessary” because of unspecified “repeated threats.” So this week’s scheduled negotiations over two days on Tuesday and Wednesday promised to finally, perhaps, move the needle. Workers say the company’s offer is one of the worst contracts they’ve seen, with hikes in health insurance and decreases in wages, along with the elimination of five lab positions.īut negotiations have also been slow in coming.īCTGM Local 100-G President Mike Moore said the two sides haven’t formally sat down in three weeks. Catch me upĪround 122 Ingredion workers in Cedar Rapids affiliated with the workers’ union-Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco and Grain Millers Local 100-G-have been on strike since Aug. However, it appears it was the hotel revoking conference rooms that ultimately caused negotiations to break down this week. I should methon my iptables is v1.6.1, my kernel is 4.9.253-tegra and this kernel is cutomized.Ingredion officials brought half a dozen armed guards to negotiations with unarmed workers in what union officials called “despicable” and “a clear attempt to silence and intimidate union members.” I really have no idea what should I do, not a single clue. I use lsmod | grep ip and found ip_set module is loaded: lsmod | grep ip Some articles mentioned iptables will load match module as required. There should be a at lease one 'set' in this file. I googled about this message, it seems iptables couldn't load ipset match, I checked the file '/proc/net/ip_tables_matches', here is the content: cat /proc/net/ip_tables_matches Iptables: No chain/target/match by that name.Įverytime this line iptables -t nat -A FABEDGE-NAT-OUTGOING -s 192.168.3.0/24 -m set -match-set FABEDGE-PEER-CIDR dst -j RETURNįailed with the message: 'iptables: No chain/target/match by that name.' ++ iptables -t nat -A FABEDGE-NAT-OUTGOING -s 192.168.3.0/24 -m set -match-set ++ iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -j FABEDGE-NAT-OUTGOING Here is the result: ++ iptables -t nat -N FABEDGE-NAT-OUTGOING Iptables -t nat -A FABEDGE-NAT-OUTGOING -s 192.168.3.0/24 -m set -match-set FABEDGE-PEER-CIDR dst -j RETURN Iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -j FABEDGE-NAT-OUTGOING Here is the rule like: ipset create FABEDGE-PEER-CIDR hash:net I tried to add some rules, but it kept failing.

Locad ipset at startup