netdev - RE: [PATCH] tcp resets are misrouted

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <62162DF05402B341B3DB59932A1FA992BB7FD47350@EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Date:	Fri, 12 Oct 2012 13:58:29 -0400
From:	Shawn Lu <shawn.lu@...csson.com>
To:	"Banerjee, Debabrata" <dbanerje@...mai.com>,
	Debabrata Banerjee <dbavatar@...il.com>,
	Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"eric.dumazet@...il.com" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	"sol@....ru" <sol@....ru>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] tcp resets are misrouted

Yes. The scenario is  the kernel doesn't have enough information to routing the packet, so application depend on binding to interface to shortcut routing.  

thanks!

Shawn Lu <shawn.lu@...csson.com> 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Banerjee, Debabrata [mailto:dbanerje@...mai.com] 
> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 10:48 AM
> To: Shawn Lu; Debabrata Banerjee; Alexey Kuznetsov
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; davem@...emloft.net; 
> eric.dumazet@...il.com; sol@....ru
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp resets are misrouted
> 
> I was trying to think of the scenario you were running into, 
> since it falls back to using a route lookup. You do not have 
> routes on your machine that would correctly send the packet, 
> I assume? Then it simply comes down to the kernel doesn't 
> have enough information to know where to send the packet.
> 
> Debabrata
> 
> On 10/12/12 1:31 PM, "Shawn Lu" <shawn.lu@...csson.com> wrote:
> 
> >I admit the commit e2446eaa did break the reset in asymmetric case.
> >There are also many use cases in interface binding, we don't want to 
> >break it too... I am ok with your patch, if asymmetric route take 
> >higher priority. Somehow, we need  come up with another one 
> to resolve 
> >RST lost in binding interface case, otherwise, people using 
> interface 
> >binding will find later on that RST break again...
> >
> >thanks!
> >
> >Shawn Lu <shawn.lu@...csson.com>
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Debabrata Banerjee [mailto:dbavatar@...il.com]
> >> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 8:57 AM
> >> To: Alexey Kuznetsov; Banerjee, Debabrata
> >> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; davem@...emloft.net; Shawn Lu; 
> >> eric.dumazet@...il.com; sol@....ru
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp resets are misrouted
> >> 
> >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov 
> >> <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru> wrote:
> >>
> >> 
> >> We ran into this as well and pulled that commit from our 
> tree, it was 
> >> causing serious problems. Sending the RST back on the iif was 
> >> definitely the wrong thing to do. Patch looks good to me.
> >> 
> >> Thanks,
> >> Debabrata
> >> 
> 
> --
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