From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: aduyck@mirantis.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, alexander.duyck@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH] IPv6: Use a 16 bit length field when computing a IPv6 UDP checksum
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 15:09:02 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160301.150902.257372984527759080.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160226025738.16760.41163.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
From: Alexander Duyck <aduyck@mirantis.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:10:59 -0800
> This change makes it so that we only use a 16 bit length field instead of a
> 32 bit length field when computing a UDP checksum for IPv6.
>
> This fixes an issue found with UDP tunnels over IPv6 where the total size
> exceeded 65536 for a frame that was to be segmented. As a result the
> checksum being computed didn't match the frame data so we ended up being
> off by 1 for the final checksum value since we didn't cancel out the upper
> 16 bits of the length.
>
> The reasoning behind this is that RFC2460 states that for protocols such as
> UDP that carry their own length field we should use that when computing the
> checksum for the pseudo-header. As such we should be using a 16 bit value,
> not a 32 bit as is currently occurring when computing the UDP checksum for
> IPv6.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <aduyck@mirantis.com>
What a can of worms. :-/
Reading RFC2460 over a few times, indeed using the truncated 16-bit length
is the thing to do for the pseudo-header checksum.
We have this mistake in a few places, for example ip6_compute_pseudo()
unconditionally uses skb->len, yet is used by UDP on receive.
Can you do a little audit and fix as many of these cases as you can find
and wrap them all into this patch?
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-01 20:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-26 3:10 [net-next PATCH] IPv6: Use a 16 bit length field when computing a IPv6 UDP checksum Alexander Duyck
2016-03-01 20:09 ` David Miller [this message]
2016-03-01 21:19 ` Alexander Duyck
2016-03-01 21:35 ` David Miller
2016-03-01 22:26 ` Alexander Duyck
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=20160301.150902.257372984527759080.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=aduyck@mirantis.com \
--cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--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 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).