linux-kernel - Re: Multicast snooping fixes and suggestions

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 23 Feb 2011 19:16:17 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@....de>
CC:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>
Subject: Re: Multicast snooping fixes and suggestions

On 02/15/2011 03:19 PM, Linus Lüssing wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> While testing the (very awesome!) bridge igmp/mld snooping support I came across
> two issues which are breaking IPv6 multicast snooping and IPv6
> non-link-local multicast on bridges with multicast snooping support enabled
> in general. The first two patches shall fix these issues.
> 
> The third one addresses a potential bug on little endian machines which I noticed
> during this little code reviewing. This patch is untested though, feedback welcome.
> 
> The fourth and fifth patch are a suggestion to also permit using the bridge multicast
> snooping feature for link local multimedia multicast traffic. Therefore
> using the transient multicast flag instead of the non-link-local scope criteria
> seems to be a suitable solution at least for IPv6, in my opinion. Let me know what
> you think about it.
> 

Hello,

I have just noticed that when using a Linux bridge, IPv6 often fails to
configure until some considerable time has passed, presumably some kind
of retry timer.  The dmesg shows:

[178292.449300] br0: port 1(eth0) entering learning state
[178292.449304] br0: port 1(eth0) entering learning state
[178302.536098] br0: no IPv6 routers present
[178307.416139] br0: port 1(eth0) entering forwarding state

... even though there is a configured and active IPv6 router on the network.

I have also seen some serious delays with DHCPv4 which presumably is due
to lost packets during bridge learning.

Are these packets likely to address that situation (or am I just plain
doing something stupid)?

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/