netdev - Question: should local address be expired when updating PMTU?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 2 Feb 2015 16:20:24 +0800
From:	shengyong <shengyong1@...wei.com>
To:	<davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <yangyingling@...wei.com>,
	<steffen.klassert@...unet.com>, <hannes@...hat.com>
Subject: Question: should local address be expired when updating PMTU?

Hi, David Miller
Since commit 81aded246 (ipv6: Handle PMTU in ICMP error handlers), the entries
in neigh table may get expired. But in the situation:

          Host only
    PC <------------> Virtual Machine

a packet is sent from PC to VM, and the packet looks like:
-----------------------------------
| IPv6 (src=PC-addr, dst=VM-addr) |
|---------------------------------|
|     ICMPv6 (Packet Too Big)     |
|---------------------------------|
| IPv6 (src=VM-addr, dst=VM-addr) |
|---------------------------------|
| ICMPv6 (Neighbor Advertisement) |
-----------------------------------

Then the local addr on VM will be updated with an expire value. After the
lifetime of the local addr is expired, the VM is unreachable from PC.

	# ip -6 route list table local
	local fe80::1 dev lo  metric 0 *expire 596*

I find that the current code seems not check whether the entry is a local one
when doing PMTU update. And if the following code is added, the situation could
be avoided.

diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
index b2614b2..b80317a 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/route.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
@@ -1136,6 +1136,9 @@ static void ip6_rt_update_pmtu(struct dst_entry *dst, struct sock *sk,
 {
        struct rt6_info *rt6 = (struct rt6_info*)dst;

+       if (rt6->rt6i_flags & RTF_LOCAL)
+               return;
+
        dst_confirm(dst);
        if (mtu < dst_mtu(dst) && rt6->rt6i_dst.plen == 128) {
                struct net *net = dev_net(dst->dev);

So is this modification correct? Or how can we avoid such expiring?

thx & BR,
Sheng

--
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