| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20130710105316.GA5735@order.stressinduktion.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 12:53:16 +0200
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
petrus.lt@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] ipv6: fix route selection if kernel is not compiled with CONFIG_IPV6_ROUTER_PREF
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:28:57AM +0200, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Le 10/07/2013 09:54, Nicolas Dichtel a écrit :
> >Le 09/07/2013 23:57, Hannes Frederic Sowa a écrit :
> >>After starting a ping6 2000::1 the box should panic soon, after the
> >>first nexthop entry times out.
> >>
> >>Perhaps you could give me a hint?
> >I will run some tests with your patch. Will see.
> I don't reproduce this panic.
I just dumped the routes for which it does increase the rt6i_nsiblings
counter in this condition:
/* If we have the same destination and the same metric,
* but not the same gateway, then the route we try to
* add is sibling to this route, increment our counter
* of siblings, and later we will add our route to the
* list.
* Only static routes (which don't have flag
* RTF_EXPIRES) are used for ECMPv6.
*
* To avoid long list, we only had siblings if the
* route have a gateway.
*/
if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_GATEWAY &&
!(rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_EXPIRES) &&
!(iter->rt6i_flags & RTF_EXPIRES))
rt->rt6i_nsiblings++;
dump_route(iter, "(iter)");
dump_route(rt, "(rt)");
}
Here:
[ 42.497470] (iter): ffff88011796cc00 dst 2000::1 plen 128 gateway 2001:db8::32, siblings 2, metric 0, expires 0 gateway 2 idev6 ffff8801139ddc00 dev ffff880117e83000
[ 42.505912] (rt): ffff88011796d800 dst 2000::1 plen 128 gateway fe80::5054:ff:fe82:e153, siblings 1, metric 0, expires 0 gateway 2 idev6 ffff880117edc400 dev ffff8801185cb000
[ 42.527241] (iter): ffff88011796d380 dst 2000::1 plen 128 gateway 2001:db8::33, siblings 2, metric 0, expires 0 gateway 2 idev6 ffff8801139ddc00 dev ffff880117e83000
[ 42.536440] (rt): ffff88011796d800 dst 2000::1 plen 128 gateway fe80::5054:ff:fe82:e153, siblings 2, metric 0, expires 0 gateway 2 idev6 ffff880117edc400 dev ffff8801185cb000
>From my understanding these two routes should not be aggregated in one ecmp
route set. Am I seeing this correct? (My configuration is like in the mail
before.)
I wonder why the '(rt)' route does not have the expires flag, but it seems we
have to special-case RTF_CACHE routes here which derive from different
levels of the fib6_tree. Does that make sense?
Greetings,
Hannes
--
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