From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
To: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <hideaki.yoshifuji@miraclelinux.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sit: correct IP protocol used in ipip6_err
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 17:34:28 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160616083426.GA31961@vergenet.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <576261F1.20007@miraclelinux.com>
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 05:23:13PM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> Hi, Simon,
>
> Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 05:06:19PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> >> Since 32b8a8e59c9c ("sit: add IPv4 over IPv4 support")
> >> ipip6_err() may be called for packets whose IP protocol is
> >> IPPROTO_IPIP as well as those whose IP protocol is IPPROTO_IPV6.
> >>
> >> In the case of IPPROTO_IPIP packets the correct protocol value is not
> >> passed to ipv4_update_pmtu() or ipv4_redirect().
> >>
> >> This patch resolves this problem by using the IP protocol of the packet
> >> rather than a hard-coded value. This appears to be consistent
> >> with the usage of the protocol of a packet by icmp_socket_deliver()
> >> the caller of ipip6_err().
> >>
> >> I was able to exercise the redirect case by using a setup where an ICMP
> >> redirect was received for the destination of the encapsulated packet.
> >> However, it appears that although incorrect the protocol field is not used
> >> in this case and thus no problem manifests. On inspection it does not
> >> appear that a problem will manifest in the fragmentation needed/update pmtu
> >> case either.
> >>
> >> In short I believe this is a cosmetic fix. None the less, the use of
> >> IPPROTO_IPV6 seems wrong and confusing.
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Dinan Gunawardena <dinan.gunawardena@netronome.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
> >
> > Apologies for not making this more obvious, this is a "net-next" patch.
>
> Acked-by: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
>
> BTW, we should have similar fix in -net, -stable etc. as well, no?
I am not opposed to this patch going there and probably it can do so
verbatim but I haven't found any run-time problems resolved by the patch.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-16 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-16 8:06 [PATCH] sit: correct IP protocol used in ipip6_err Simon Horman
2016-06-16 8:10 ` Simon Horman
2016-06-16 8:23 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki
2016-06-16 8:34 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2016-06-17 0:11 ` 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=20160616083426.GA31961@vergenet.net \
--to=simon.horman@netronome.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hideaki.yoshifuji@miraclelinux.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).