netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] IPV4: remove addresses and routes when carrier is lost

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: <20080603093159.36070e73@extreme>
Date:	Tue, 3 Jun 2008 09:31:59 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen.hemminger@...tta.com>,
	Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] IPV4: remove addresses and routes when carrier is
 lost

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 18:03:46 +0200
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> wrote:

> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 11:05:24 -0400
> > lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
> > 
> >> On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 04:52:49PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >>> This patch adds a new configuration sysctl that causes link loss to clear
> >>> FIB state in the same way as admin down. This allows for routing daemons
> >>> like Quagga which have option to remove routes when carrier is lost.
> >>>
> >>> This has been a long standing problem with Quagga on Linux with complaints
> >>> on the developers list going back to 2004. Fixing it properly, so the routing 
> >>> daemon manages the RIB, and the kernel manages the FIB, requires changes to
> >>> both parts.
> >> Does this cover only the local route for the interface, or all routes
> >> assigned staticly to the interface too?
> > 
> > The patch makes carrier down == interface down. So the same
> > behaviour as doing 'ip link set dev eth3 down'
> 
> 
> Can't the routing daemon simply ignore routes with a
> device that has no carrier?
> 

It does that, but the problem is that packets get routed in kernel
to interfaces without carrier, rather than being correctly rerouted
over alternate paths.
--
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