[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <loom.20130124T102348-176@post.gmane.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:11:39 +0000 (UTC)
From: Axel Neumann <neumann@...s.de>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: fix handling of throw routes
Hi
Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel <at> 6wind.com> writes:
>
> Le 07/09/2012 20:18, David Miller a écrit :
> > From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel <at> 6wind.com>
> > Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 11:53:35 -0400
> >
> >> It's the same problem that previous fix about blackhole and prohibit routes.
> >>
> >> When adding a throw route, it was handled like a classic route.
> >> Moreover, it was only possible to add this kind of routes by specifying
> >> an interface.
> >>
> >> Before the patch:
> >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128
> >> RTNETLINK answers: No such device
> >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 dev eth0
> >> $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2
> >> 2001::2 dev eth0 metric 1024
> >>
> >> After:
> >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128
> >> $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2
> >> throw 2001::2 dev lo metric 1024 error -11
> >>
> >> Reported-by: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg <at> iki.fi>
> >> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel <at> 6wind.com>
> >
> > Applied, thanks.
Although 'ip -6 route show' now reports a "throw" instead of an "unreachable"
route the behavior of a configured IPv6 "throw" route still seems incorrect and
similar to that of an "unreachable" route!
I've tested with kernel 3.7.4 which includes this patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git;a=commitdiff;h=ef2c7d7b59708d54213c7556a82d14de9a7e4475
An example scenario using a dedicated routing table (IMHO the main use case for
throw routes) is given below...
greetings
/axel
The following scenario shows an example:
computer 1001 and 1002 connected via ethernet eth2
computer 1002 has 1001:2::2/64 on eth2
Now at computer 1001:
root@...1001:~# ping6 1001:2::2 -c 1
connect: Network is unreachable
root@...1001:~# ip a add 1001:2::1/64 dev eth2
root@...1001:~# ip -6 rule add from all lookup 10 pref 1000
root@...1001:~# ip -6 rule
0: from all lookup local
1000: from all lookup 10
32766: from all lookup main
root@...1001:~# ip -6 route list table 10
root@...1001:~# ping6 1001:2::2 -c 1
PING 1001:2::2(1001:2::2) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 1001:2::2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.263 ms
--- 1001:2::2 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.263/0.263/0.263/0.000 ms
root@...1001:~# ip -6 route add throw 1001:2::/64 table 10
root@...1001:~# ip -6 route list table 10
throw 1001:2::/64 dev lo metric 1024 error -11
root@...1001:~# ping6 1001:2::2 -c 1
connect: Resource temporarily unavailable
# Although the destination lookup should only be thrown for table 10
# and continue on the main table where a valid local route exists
# it fails. For remote throw routes the error says something like:
# From 1001:2::2 icmp_seq=1 Destination unreachable: No route
# Removing the throw route again it works again...
root@...1001:~# ip -6 r
1001:2::/64 dev eth2 proto kernel metric 256
fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256
fe80::/64 dev eth1 proto kernel metric 256
fe80::/64 dev eth2 proto kernel metric 256
root@...1001:~# ip -6 route del throw 1001:2::/64 table 10
root@...1001:~# ping6 1001:2::2 -c 1
PING 1001:2::2(1001:2::2) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 1001:2::2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.264 ms
--- 1001:2::2 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.264/0.264/0.264/0.000 ms
root@...1001:~# ip -6 r
1001:2::2 via 1001:2::2 dev eth2 metric 0
cache
1001:2::/64 dev eth2 proto kernel metric 256
fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256
fe80::/64 dev eth1 proto kernel metric 256
fe80::/64 dev eth2 proto kernel metric 256
root@...1001:~#
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists