From: Christoph Grenz <christophg+lkml@grenz-bonn.de>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Destination Options question
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 02:59:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98532586.q66oQjG9bA@cg-notebook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10108598.co7siHb18S@cg-notebook>
Hi Tom,
I narrowed the issue down to a possible bug in the kernel-side IPv6 checksum
calculation:
A raw socket for IPPROTO_MH has checksum calculation/verification enabled by
default (as if setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_CHECKSUM, 4) was used).
I get different checksums for the same packet with and without IPV6_DSTOPTS
ancillary data. The checksum is independent of the content of the Destination
Options, but adding multiple IPV6_DSTOPTS anciliary data items changes the
calculated checksum, even if the resulting packet is otherwise identical.
The checksum verification then discards the packets on the receiving side,
which is why I didn't get any packets on my IPPROTO_MH socket and suspected a
problem on the receiving side first.
When I calculate the checksum in userspace and set the IPV6_CHECKSUM socket
option to -1 to disable the in-kernel calculation on the sending side, I
receive all packets as expected.
It doesn't happen with IPV6_HOPOPTS or IPV6_RTHDR ancillary data, at least as
far as I checked.
Could you take a look at it before I submit a bug report?
Best regards
Christoph
Am Samstag, 14. Dezember 2019, 22:11:01 CET schrieb Christoph Grenz:
> Hi Tom,
>
> my receive code boils down to this Python script:
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> #!/usr/bin/env python3
>
> from socket import socket, AF_INET6, IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_RECVDSTOPTS,
> SOCK_RAW
>
> IPPROTO_MH = 135 # IPv6 Mobility Header
>
> sock = socket(AF_INET6, SOCK_RAW, IPPROTO_MH)
> sock.setsockopt(IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_RECVDSTOPTS, True)
>
> sock.bind(('::', 0))
>
> while True:
> packet, ancdata, msg_flags, address = sock.recvmsg(1800, 512)
> print(address[0], packet.hex(), ancdata)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Best regards,
> Christoph
>
> Am Samstag, 14. Dezember 2019, 12:40:16 CET schrieb Tom Herbert:
> > On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 8:19 AM Christoph Grenz
> >
> > <christophg+lkml@grenz-bonn.de> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I'm playing around with Mobile IPv6 and noticed a strange behaviour in
> > > the
> > > Linux network system when using IPv6 destination options:
> > >
> > > I'm able to send destination options on SOCK_DGRAM and SOCK_RAW sockets
> > > with sendmsg() and IPV6_DSTOPTS ancillary data. The sent packets also
> > > look correct in Wireshark.
> > >
> > > But I'm not able to receive packets with destination options on a socket
> > > with the IPV6_RECVDSTOPTS socket option enabled. Both a packet with a
> > > Home Address Option and a packet with an empty destination options
> > > header
> > > (only containing padding) won't be received on a socket for the payload
> > > protocol.
> >
> > Christoph, Can you post your receive code?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > > Only a SOCK_RAW socket for IPPROTO_DSTOPTS receives the packet.
> > >
> > > I tested this on a vanilla 5.4.0 kernel and got the same behaviour.
> > > Activating dyndbg for everything in net/ipv6 didn't produce any relevant
> > > output in dmesg.
> > >
> > > Is this expected behaviour or a bug? Or do I maybe need some other
> > > socket
> > > option or a xfrm policy to receive packets with destination options?
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > > Christoph
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-16 1:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-14 16:11 IPv6 Destination Options question Christoph Grenz
2019-12-14 20:40 ` Tom Herbert
2019-12-14 21:11 ` Christoph Grenz
2019-12-16 1:59 ` Christoph Grenz [this message]
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=98532586.q66oQjG9bA@cg-notebook \
--to=christophg+lkml@grenz-bonn.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom@herbertland.com \
/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.