Re: [RFC] net: ipv4: drop unicast encapsulated in L2 multicast

All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: ja@ssi.bg, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: ipv4: drop unicast encapsulated in L2 multicast
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 22:31:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1416519074.8557.15.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140822.105405.1982870131653082781.davem@davemloft.net>

On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 10:54 -0700, David Miller wrote:

> >>  	if (res.type == RTN_BROADCAST)
> >>  		goto brd_input;
> > 
> > 	Is this place better, after checking for RTN_BROADCAST?
> > 
> > 	/* ARP link-layer broadcasts are acceptable here */
> > 	if ((skb->pkt_type == PACKET_BROADCAST ||
> > 	     skb->pkt_type == PACKET_MULTICAST) &&
> > 	    skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP))
> > 		goto e_inval;
> 
> Indeed, this would make ARP happier, but that still leaves open the
> issue of CLUSTERIP.

I'm back looking at this, but must admit I'm completely confused now :-)

I could add an IPv4 sysctl to control this behaviour:
  0 - off
  1 - RFC 1122 "SHOULD"
  2 - also drop unicast-in-multicast (for wireless)

But I guess due to cluster-IP it would have to default to 0.


However, talk about ip_local_deliver_finish() in this thread has me
wondering if we could just implement it using iptables? I guess
ipt_addrtype and ip6t_addrtype would let me do that?

johannes

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)

From: Johannes Berg <johannes-cdvu00un1VgdHxzADdlk8Q@public.gmane.org>
To: David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>
Cc: ja-FgGsKACvmQM@public.gmane.org,
	linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: ipv4: drop unicast encapsulated in L2 multicast
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 22:31:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1416519074.8557.15.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140822.105405.1982870131653082781.davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>

On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 10:54 -0700, David Miller wrote:

> >>  	if (res.type == RTN_BROADCAST)
> >>  		goto brd_input;
> > 
> > 	Is this place better, after checking for RTN_BROADCAST?
> > 
> > 	/* ARP link-layer broadcasts are acceptable here */
> > 	if ((skb->pkt_type == PACKET_BROADCAST ||
> > 	     skb->pkt_type == PACKET_MULTICAST) &&
> > 	    skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP))
> > 		goto e_inval;
> 
> Indeed, this would make ARP happier, but that still leaves open the
> issue of CLUSTERIP.

I'm back looking at this, but must admit I'm completely confused now :-)

I could add an IPv4 sysctl to control this behaviour:
  0 - off
  1 - RFC 1122 "SHOULD"
  2 - also drop unicast-in-multicast (for wireless)

But I guess due to cluster-IP it would have to default to 0.


However, talk about ip_local_deliver_finish() in this thread has me
wondering if we could just implement it using iptables? I guess
ipt_addrtype and ip6t_addrtype would let me do that?

johannes


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

next prev parent reply	other threads:[~2014-11-20 21:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-21 17:22 [RFC] net: ipv4: drop unicast encapsulated in L2 multicast Johannes Berg
2014-08-21 17:32 ` Johannes Berg
2014-08-27  7:38   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2014-08-27  7:38     ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2014-08-27  9:05     ` Johannes Berg
2014-08-27  9:53       ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2014-09-02  9:36         ` Johannes Berg
2014-09-03  1:59           ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki
2014-09-02 22:03             ` David Miller
2014-09-02 22:03               ` David Miller
2014-09-03 12:01               ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2014-09-03 12:01                 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2014-08-21 19:51 ` Julian Anastasov
2014-08-22 17:54   ` David Miller
2014-08-22 17:54     ` David Miller
2014-08-27  9:13     ` Johannes Berg
2014-08-27 10:23       ` Julian Anastasov
2014-08-27 10:23         ` Julian Anastasov
2014-08-27 11:29         ` Johannes Berg
2014-08-27 11:29           ` Johannes Berg
2014-08-27 14:31           ` Julian Anastasov
2014-09-02  9:33             ` Johannes Berg
2014-11-20 21:31     ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2014-11-20 21:31       ` Johannes Berg
2014-09-02 21:16 ` Stephen Hemminger
2014-09-02 21:16   ` Stephen Hemminger
2014-09-03  9:40   ` Johannes Berg
2014-09-03  9:40     ` Johannes Berg

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1416519074.8557.15.camel@sipsolutions.net \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=ja@ssi.bg \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.