netdev - Re: echo > 0 .../disable_ipv6 broken in 2.6.37-rc4

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: <m14oaoeywf.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date:	Wed, 08 Dec 2010 13:29:52 -0800
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Brian Haley <brian.haley@...com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Mahesh Kelkar <maheshkelkar@...il.com>,
	Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: echo > 0 .../disable_ipv6 broken in 2.6.37-rc4

Brian Haley <brian.haley@...com> writes:

> On 12/05/2010 07:24 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> 
>> In 2.6.37-rc4 ipv6 can be disabled not enabled.
>> The last kernel I have tested and know this works on is 2.6.33.
>> 
>> To reproduce:
>>    ~ # ip link set lo up
>>    ~ # ping6 ::1
>>    PING ::1(::1) 56 data bytes
>>    64 bytes from ::1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.026 ms
>>    ^C
>>    --- ::1 ping statistics ---
>>    1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 782ms
>>    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.026/0.026/0.026/0.000 ms
>>    ~ # echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/lo/disable_ipv6 
>>    ~ # ping6 ::1
>>    connect: Network is unreachable
>>    ~ # echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/lo/disable_ipv6 
>>    ~ # ping6 ::1
>>    connect: Network is unreachable
>> 
>> 
>> I intend to poke at this a little more but at the moment
>> I am drawing a blank at what is going on.
>
> It should just be calling addrconf_notify() with either NETDEV_UP
> or NETDEV_DOWN.  Does the address not come back?  Or the route?

The address never went away, and I don't think we have a route to ::1.

Playing with this a little more if I delete the address and then bounce
the interface ping ::1 works again.  So something is just not getting
reinitialized.

Unfortunately I don't see anything obvious.  I'm still scratching my
head.

>> I intend to keep poking at this but if anyone can figure this out
>> before I do I would be greatly appreciative.
>
> I'm pulling the latest tree now, my 2.6.32.24 system is running fine, so
> it's something after that.

Agreed.  I don't have problems on 2.6.33 either, but because of overload
I haven't been doing regular testing of the kernels inbetween.

Eric
--
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