[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131029120329.GB18526@minipsycho.orion>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 13:03:29 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, pablo@...filter.org,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: IPV6 nf defrag does not work
Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:56:17PM CET, fw@...len.de wrote:
>Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>> On the current net-next if you on HOSTA do:
>> ip6tables -I INPUT -p icmpv6 -j DROP
>> ip6tables -I INPUT -p icmpv6 -m icmp6 --icmpv6-type 128 -j ACCEPT
>>
>> and on HOSTB you do:
>> ping6 HOSTA -s2000 (MTU is 1500)
>>
>> Only the first ICMP echo request will be passed through, the rest is not
>> passed on HOSTA. This issue does not occur with smaller packets than MTU (where
>> fragmentation does not happen).
>>
>> I'm trying to find out where the problem is.
>
>Are you sure this is new behaviour? As far back as I can remember
>it was always like this.
Yes. This is not new.
>
>in ip6tables, the individual fragments are sent through the ruleset,
>iow. you'll need to make use of '-m conntrack' to match the fragments
>belonging to an existing connection.
Hmm. I think that it is not correct to force user (iptables user) to
make dirrerent rules because some ipv6 packets might be fragmented.
This should be handled in kernel.
>
>I don't know why this is, and I don't like this either.
>But this is how it was implemented, see
>
>net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_defrag_ipv6_hooks.c, ipv6_defrag() ->
>nf_ct_frag6_output()
Yep. I'm studying the code atm.
--
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