netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 0/1] Add support of ECMPv6

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c6a5aae8c773f78aaa1c59cfb68a3d52@luffy.cx>
Date:	Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:36:08 +0200
From:	Vincent Bernat <bernat@...fy.cx>
To:	<nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
Cc:	<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 0/1] Add support of ECMPv6

Le 14.09.2012 15:35, Nicolas Dichtel a écrit :

>> Therefore, the problem is not in iproute2 which knows how to display
>> those ECMP routes. I fear that this difference make support in 
>> routing
>> daemons more difficult.
> Hmm, can you elaborate? Our routing daemon, quagga, manage it without
> any problem.

Hi!

Sorry for the late answer. I have been experimenting with your patch 
and it seems that Quagga does not handle such routes. Do you have some 
patchset on top of Quagga? I am looking at 
28971c8cb1138700e87dc7da673e59b5596bb51b (which is fairly recent) and in 
zebra/rt_netlink.c, IPv6 routes are handled as IPv4 routes: multiple 
hops are added as attributes.

In Quagga, I do:

ipv6 route 2001:db8:97::/64 2001:db8:1::2
ipv6 route 2001:db8:97::/64 2001:db8:2::2

And I get:

r1(VTY)# show ipv6  route
Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, S - static, R - RIPng,
        O - OSPFv6, I - IS-IS, B - BGP, A - Babel,
        > - selected route, * - FIB route

C>* ::1/128 is directly connected, lo
O   2001:db8:1::/64 [110/1] is directly connected, eth0, 01:52:42
C>* 2001:db8:1::/64 is directly connected, eth0
O   2001:db8:2::/64 [110/1] is directly connected, eth1, 01:52:37
C>* 2001:db8:2::/64 is directly connected, eth1
S>  2001:db8:97::/64 [1/0] via 2001:db8:1::2, eth0
                            via 2001:db8:2::2, eth1
K>* 2001:db8:98::/64 via 2001:db8:2::2, eth1
C>* 2001:db8:99::/64 is directly connected, dummy0
C * fe80::/64 is directly connected, eth1
C * fe80::/64 is directly connected, eth0
C>* fe80::/64 is directly connected, dummy0

The route is not installed in the kernel (not "*"):

2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: rib_process: 2001:db8:97::/64: Updating 
existing route, select 0x7fee39f0ad10, fib 0x7fee39f0ad10
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink_route_multipath() (multihop): 
RTM_DELROUTE 2001:db8:97::/64, type IPv6 nexthop
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink_route_multipath() (multihop): 
nexthop via 2001:db8:1::2 if 4
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink_talk: netlink-cmd type 
RTM_DELROUTE(25), seq=27
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink_route_multipath() (multihop): 
RTM_NEWROUTE 2001:db8:97::/64, type IPv6 nexthop
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink_route_multipath() (multihop): 
nexthop via 2001:db8:1::2 if 4
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink_route_multipath() (multihop): 
RTM_NEWROUTE 2001:db8:97::/64, type IPv6 nexthop
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink_route_multipath() (multihop): 
nexthop via 2001:db8:2::2 if 5
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink_talk: netlink-cmd type 
RTM_NEWROUTE(24), seq=28
2012/10/15 14:22:01 ZEBRA: netlink-cmd error: No such process, 
type=RTM_NEWROUTE(24), seq=28, pid=0

The problem is the same with BIRD. The difference with IPv4 makes it 
difficult to factor the code between IPv4 and IPv6. What do you think?

--
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