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  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:   Sat, 4 May 2019 20:56:39 -0600
From:   David Ahern <>
To:     linmiaohe <>,,,,,
Cc:     mousuanming <>,
        Mingfangsen <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: route: Fix vrf dst_entry ref count false

On 5/4/19 8:11 PM, linmiaohe wrote:
> On 2019/5/4 22:59, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 5/4/19 7:13 AM, linmiaohe wrote:
>>> From: Suanming.Mou <>
>>> When config ip in default vrf same as the ip in specified
>>> vrf, fib_lookup will return the route from table local
>>> even if the in device is an enslaved l3mdev. Then the
>> you need to move the local rule with a preference of 0 after the l3mdev
>> rule.
> Move the local rule after l3mdev rule can get rid of this problem. And
> even if this happend, we can delete the same ip address in default vrf
> to fix it.
> But I think maybe it's still a problem because other rule with default
> vrf out device holds the specified vrf device. It looks unreasonable.
> Many Thanks.

VRF is implemented using policy routing. If you do not move the local
rule below the l3mdev rule, you are doing a lookup in the local table
first, then vrf table, then main table. Doing the local table first can
result in false hits - like the case of duplicate IP addresses in
default VRF and a VRF. In short, it is just wrong.

Looking at the VRF documentation in the kernel tree I do see such a
comment is missing, but I do mention in all of the VRF tutorials such as
this one (see slide 79):

Powered by blists - more mailing lists