[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150203092845.GT13046@secunet.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 10:28:46 +0100
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To: shengyong <shengyong1@...wei.com>
CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<yangyingling@...wei.com>, <hannes@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Question: should local address be expired when updating PMTU?
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 04:20:24PM +0800, shengyong wrote:
> Hi, David Miller
> Since commit 81aded246 (ipv6: Handle PMTU in ICMP error handlers), the entries
> in neigh table may get expired. But in the situation:
>
> Host only
> PC <------------> Virtual Machine
>
> a packet is sent from PC to VM, and the packet looks like:
> -----------------------------------
> | IPv6 (src=PC-addr, dst=VM-addr) |
> |---------------------------------|
> | ICMPv6 (Packet Too Big) |
> |---------------------------------|
> | IPv6 (src=VM-addr, dst=VM-addr) |
> |---------------------------------|
> | ICMPv6 (Neighbor Advertisement) |
> -----------------------------------
>
> Then the local addr on VM will be updated with an expire value. After the
> lifetime of the local addr is expired, the VM is unreachable from PC.
>
> # ip -6 route list table local
> local fe80::1 dev lo metric 0 *expire 596*
We first need to find out why you receive this Packet Too Big message,
can you capture this packet somehow? Then we have to see why this loopback
route gets a pmtu update from that packet. Is the destination address
of the Packet Too Big message really fe80::1?
--
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