From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: jme: UDP checksum error, and lots of them Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 20:09:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20101201.200935.71110482.davem@davemloft.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, cooldavid@cooldavid.org To: jengelh@medozas.de Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:60559 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756879Ab0LBEJI (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2010 23:09:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Jan Engelhardt Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 04:39:34 +0100 (CET) > Why does the JME driver care so much about this that it needs to print > this for every packet? It does not look like it has any offloading > features. Well I'm glad it let us know about the bad checksum which would otherwise have been unnoticed. Please try to pinpoint why the checksum is bad, because it seems that tcpdump agrees with the driver. Perhaps it's some side effect of how vpnc uses TUN/TAP, or something like that. Seeing the bad checksum even in tcpdump, and then seeing proper replies going back, that is very suspicious and should be looked into.