linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xfrm: fix tunnel model fragmentation behavior

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]

Message-ID: <20220223082510.GL17351@gauss3.secunet.de>
Date:   Wed, 23 Feb 2022 09:25:10 +0100
From:   Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:     Lina Wang <lina.wang@...iatek.com>
CC:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        "David Ahern" <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "Matthias Brugger" <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfrm: fix tunnel model fragmentation behavior

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:18:04AM +0800, Lina Wang wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-02-21 at 12:04 +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 01:16:48PM +0800, Lina Wang wrote:
> > > in tunnel mode, if outer interface(ipv4) is less, it is easily to
> We have two commits in the ipsec tree that address a very similar
> > issue. That is:
> > 
> > commit 6596a0229541270fb8d38d989f91b78838e5e9da
> > xfrm: fix MTU regression
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > commit a6d95c5a628a09be129f25d5663a7e9db8261f51
> > Revert "xfrm: xfrm_state_mtu should return at least 1280 for ipv6"
> > 
> > Can you please doublecheck that the issue you are fixing still
> > exist in the ipsec tree?
> 
> Yes, I know the two patches, which didnot help for my scenary. Whatever 
> commit a6d95c5a62 exist or not, there still is double fragment issue. From
> commit 6596a022's mail thread, owner has met double fragment issue, I am 
> not sure if it is the same with mine.

Thanks for the doublecking this!