[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <11f89a6a-0eb0-eb60-37e8-9fe6e33516ac@digineo.de>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 14:04:21 +0200
From: Arthur Skowronek <ags@...ineo.de>
To: Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Subject: Re: gue6 bad checksums in udp header
Sorry, I forgot to add the maintainers of this subsystem to the CC list.
On 04.06.19 19:46, Arthur Skowronek wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> it appears that there is an issue with the content of the checksum field
> in udp packets which are transmitted through a gue encapsulated ipip
> tunnel over ipv6.
>
> I spent the past few days with experimenting around with the gue
> encapsulation capabilities for ipip tunnels in the linux kernel. The
> first system is running the version 4.14.121 from openwrt on an ubiquiti
> edgerouter x and the second system is my workstation PC which is running
> the linux kernel 4.19.47 and arch linux.
>
> The gue feature on the edgerouter x seems to be broken though. All
> packets originating from this system have a bad UDP checksum. Packets
> coming from my workstation are fine though. I assume that the problem
> lies somewhere in the kernel because all operations involving the ip
> tunnel are handled in kernel and it doesn't seem like userspace is
> involved at all. I don't think it's an exact issue with the embedded
> device itself since other UDP packets which are sent over ipv6 are fine.
> It seems to be an isolated issue with the gue implementation of the
> kernel in combination with this device.
>
> This is the script I use to set up the tunneling:
>
> # To be executed on the router
> export systemA='2a06:redacted::163'
> export systemB='2a06:redacted::21'
>
> ip fou add port 9191 gue -6
> ip link add name fou type ip6tnl \
> remote "$systemB" local "$systemA" \
> encap gue encap-dport 9191 encap-sport 9191 mode any
> ip link set up dev fou
> ip addr add 'fe80::1' dev fou
>
> # To be executed on the workstation
> export systemA='2a06:redacted::163'
> export systemB='2a06:redacted::21'
>
> ip fou add port 9191 gue -6
> ip link add name fou type ip6tnl \
> remote "$systemA" local "$systemB" \
> encap gue encap-dport 9191 encap-sport 9191 mode any
> ip link set up dev fou
> ip addr add 'fe80::2' dev fou
>
> This works and the interfaces are allocated properly. When I try to ping
> the workstation from the ERX device now it seems that the packets sent
> by the router have the wrong UDP checksum though. This is taken from
> wireshark:
>
> Internet Protocol Version 6, Src: 2a06:redacted::163, Dst:
> 2a06:redacted::21
> 0110 .... = Version: 6
> .... 0000 0000 .... .... .... .... .... = Traffic Class: 0x00
> (DSCP: CS0, ECN: Not-ECT)
> .... .... .... 1101 0000 1111 0000 0001 = Flow Label: 0xd0f01
> Payload Length: 124
> Next Header: Destination Options for IPv6 (60)
> Hop Limit: 64
> Source: 2a06:redacted::163
> Destination: 2a06:redacted::21
> Destination Options for IPv6
> Next Header: UDP (17)
> Length: 0
> [Length: 8 bytes]
> Tunnel Encapsulation Limit
> PadN
> User Datagram Protocol, Src Port: 9191, Dst Port: 9191
> Source Port: 9191
> Destination Port: 9191
> Length: 116
> Checksum: 0x2272 incorrect, should be 0xec0d (maybe caused by
> "UDP checksum offload"?)
> [Checksum Status: Bad]
> [Stream index: 69]
> [Timestamps]
> Data (108 bytes)
> Data: 00290000600d0f0100403a40fe8000000000000000000000…
> [Length: 108]
>
> Unfortunatelly I'm not particularly well versed in the internals of the
> Linux networking code so it's a little bit difficult for me to debug the
> problem in greater detail. From what I can tell it seems like the the
> checksum is only computed over the pseudo IP header, missing out the UDP
> Header and the GUE header. As far as I understand the documents
> describing UDP in ip6 it seems that the checksum needs to be generated
> over the entire payload for UDP in ip6 though.
>
> I don't know how to solve this problem in a way that works nicely with
> the checksum offloading capabilities in the kernel though. I have no
> experience in developing directly in the Linux kernel and this subsystem
> looks really intimidating to me. Any help in solving this problem would
> be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much.
>
>
> Greetings,
> Arthur Skowronek
--
Arthur Skowronek
Software Engineer
Digineo GmbH
Fahrenheitstraße 15
28359 Bremen
Telefon: +49 421 167 66 090
Telefax: +49 421 167 66 099
E-Mail: ags@...ineo.de
Internet: https://www.digineo.de
Geschäftsführer: Dipl.-Inf. Julian Kornberger
Amtsgericht Bremen HBR 25061
USt-ID: DE 815023724
Powered by blists - more mailing lists