[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADAe=+Kf+khMreH91-zWDX8839nC_rB63EvfxPC+qefy==c8aw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 06:45:34 +0530
From: Ajith Adapa <adapa.ajith@...il.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regarding processing IGMPv2 reports from a snooping switch
Ideally IGMPv2 report packet with source address as zero should be
processed as per the standard.
Is there any special reason why the packet is dropped ?
Regards,
Ajith
--------------------------------------------
codingfreak.in
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Ajith Adapa <adapa.ajith@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Router -- snooping switch -- host(s)
>
> Router sends a general igmpv2 query which is forwarded to host(s).
>
> Hosts reply back with report messages that they r intrested in group G
> (i.e. 234.1.1.1) as destination address.
>
> Let us say report suppression is enabled in igmp snooping switch. So
> switch sends a single report message to router with source address as
> 0.0.0.0 and destination address as group address G (for e.g.
> 234.1.1.1).
>
> But linux kernel in multicast router is dropping the packet.
>
> in ipv4/route.c in ip_route_input_mc function
>
> if (ipv4_is_zeronet(saddr)) {
> if (!ipv4_is_local_multicast(daddr))
> goto e_inval;
>
> Ideally packet is dropped in above code. Is it expected behaviour ?
>
> Regards,
> Ajith
> --------------------------------------------
> codingfreak.in
--
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