netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: dlstevens@us.ibm.com
Cc: brian.haley@hp.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: only modify checksum for UDP
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 16:50:58 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061113.165058.15265737.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OFF1265537.E903A772-ON88257222.006212AE-88257222.00626AB7@us.ibm.com>

From: David Stevens <dlstevens@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 09:54:58 -0800

> The Internet checksum is defined as a 1's-complement sum, so if  the
> alternate 0 does not have a special meaning in a protocol, then by
> 1's-complement arithmetic, 0 == ~0.
>         So, it looks to me without the remapping that a valid checksum
> may also fail, if it is simply computed in a different way (or on a 
> different
> architecture) such that one gets 0 and one gets ~0 as un-modified answers.
>         Since we're checking for equality on 2's-complement machines,
> I think the easiest thing is to still re-map it. Otherwise, instead of 
> testing
> for 0, we have to test for both 0 and ~0 in the validity checks, right?

Puzzling :-)  Then why is the transformation only performed for
UDP in the ipv4 stack?  It seems by your logic TCP would need
to either do the "if (sum==0) sum=~0;"  thing or it would need
to accept both "0" and "~0" in the checksum checking path.

  reply	other threads:[~2006-11-14  0:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-11-08 22:13 why do we mangle checksums for v6 ICMP? Al Viro
2006-11-08 22:28 ` Al Viro
2006-11-09 17:32 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-09 23:14   ` David Miller
2006-11-10 16:24     ` [PATCH] IPv6: only modify checksum for UDP Brian Haley
2006-11-10 17:54       ` David Stevens
2006-11-14  0:50         ` David Miller [this message]
2006-11-14  1:18           ` Al Viro
2006-11-14  1:44           ` David Stevens
2006-11-14  1:52             ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 22:55       ` David Miller
2006-11-10 23:17         ` Nivedita Singhvi
2006-11-10 23:26           ` David Miller
2006-11-10 23:36             ` Nivedita Singhvi
2006-11-12  1:30             ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 16:25     ` [PATCH] IPv6: optimize echo reply checksum calculation Brian Haley
2006-11-10 17:34       ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 17:51         ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 18:05           ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 18:20             ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 19:04               ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 19:17                 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 21:06                   ` Brian Haley
2006-11-11  1:45                     ` Al Viro
2006-11-11 18:07     ` why do we mangle checksums for v6 ICMP? Bill Fink
2006-11-13  7:04       ` David Miller

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=20061113.165058.15265737.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=brian.haley@hp.com \
    --cc=dlstevens@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).