[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171213101259.65652da6@xeon-e3>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 10:12:59 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To: Daniel Lakeland <dlakelan@...eet-artists.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG REPORT: iproute2 seems to have bug with dsfield/tos in
ip-rule and ip-route
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:40:08 -0800
Daniel Lakeland <dlakelan@...eet-artists.org> wrote:
> This same problem as detailed here
>
> http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2010/03/26/36
This mail reports an issue from 7 years ago, much nas
changed since then.
>
> or here:
>
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/lartc/msg22541.html
>
> bit me today
>
> I tried either
>
> ip rule add dsfield CS6 table 100
>
> or
>
> ip rule add dsfield 0xc0 table 100
>
> or replace dsfield with tos, all return:
>
> RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument
>
> on the other hand, for ip route it will accept the ds/tos values
>
> ip route add default dsfield CS6 dev dummy0
>
> or
>
> ip route add default dsfield 0xc0 dev dummy0
>
> but packets tagged with CS6 don't go to dummy0 they go the regular
> default route
>
>
The kernel is complaining that ip rule is not valid, (ie not iproute2 issue).
Not sure exactly why or where in fib_rules.c this is happening.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists