netdev - Re: Possible networking regression in 3.6.0

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Mon, 01 Oct 2012 17:31:38 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Chris Clayton <chris2553@...glemail.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	gpiez@....de
Subject: Re: Possible networking regression in 3.6.0

On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:13 +0100, Chris Clayton wrote:
> 
> On 10/01/12 10:15, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 09:36 +0100, Chris Clayton wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>       0 ICMP messages received
> >>       0 input ICMP message failed.
> >>       ICMP input histogram:
> >>       0 ICMP messages sent
> >>       0 ICMP messages failed
> >>       ICMP output histogram:
> >
> >>
> >> After:
> >>
> >> $ netstat -s
> >> Icmp:
> >>       4 ICMP messages received
> >>       4 input ICMP message failed.
> >>       ICMP input histogram:
> >>           echo replies: 4
> >
> > So icmp replies come back and are delivered to host instead of being
> > forwarded.
> >
> > I wonder if MASQUERADE broke...
> >
> > Could you send
> >
> > iptables -t -nat -nvL
> 
> $ iptables -t -nat -nvL
> iptables v1.4.15: can't initialize iptables table `-nat': Table does not 
> exist (do you need to insmod?)
> Perhaps iptables or your kernel needs to be upgraded.
> 
> > conntrack -L   # while ping is running from guest
> 
> $ conntrack -L
> conntrack v1.2.2 (conntrack-tools): Operation failed: invalid parameters
> 

Thats not expected, you described you used MASQUERADE target, so
"iptables -t nat -nvL" should display something.


> Forgive me for asking, but why is the problem not down to the change 
> that I identified by bisecting? The title of the patch is "ipv4: Cache 
> local output routes" and, although I'm a million miles from being an 
> expert here, to me it does make it look a good candidate. 
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=134797809611847&w=2

Because I cant reproduce your problem at all, using your setup.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html