From: Matteo Croce <mcroce@redhat.com>
To: "David S . Miller " <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH net-next] icmp: don't fail on fragment reassembly time exceeded
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:12:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171012141237.2209-1-mcroce@redhat.com> (raw)
The ICMP implementation currently replies to an ICMP time exceeded message
(type 11) with an ICMP host unreachable message (type 3, code 1).
However, time exceeded messages can either represent "time to live exceeded
in transit" (code 0) or "fragment reassembly time exceeded" (code 1).
Unconditionally replying to "fragment reassembly time exceeded" with
host unreachable messages might cause unjustified connection resets
which are now easily triggered as UFO has been removed, because, in turn,
sending large buffers triggers IP fragmentation.
The issue can be easily reproduced by running a lot of UDP streams
which is likely to trigger IP fragmentation:
# start netserver in the test namespace
ip netns add test
ip netns exec test netserver
# create a VETH pair
ip link add name veth0 type veth peer name veth0 netns test
ip link set veth0 up
ip -n test link set veth0 up
for i in $(seq 20 29); do
# assign addresses to both ends
ip addr add dev veth0 192.168.$i.1/24
ip -n test addr add dev veth0 192.168.$i.2/24
# start the traffic
netperf -L 192.168.$i.1 -H 192.168.$i.2 -t UDP_STREAM -l 0 &
done
# wait
send_data: data send error: No route to host (errno 113)
netperf: send_omni: send_data failed: No route to host
We need to differentiate instead: if fragment reassembly time exceeded
is reported, we need to silently drop the packet,
if time to live exceeded is reported, maintain the current behaviour.
In both cases increment the related error count "icmpInTimeExcds".
While at it, fix a typo in a comment, and convert the if statement
into a switch to mate it more readable.
Signed-off-by: Matteo Croce <mcroce@redhat.com>
---
net/ipv4/icmp.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/ipv4/icmp.c b/net/ipv4/icmp.c
index 681e33998e03..3c1570d3e22f 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/icmp.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/icmp.c
@@ -782,7 +782,7 @@ static bool icmp_tag_validation(int proto)
}
/*
- * Handle ICMP_DEST_UNREACH, ICMP_TIME_EXCEED, ICMP_QUENCH, and
+ * Handle ICMP_DEST_UNREACH, ICMP_TIME_EXCEEDED, ICMP_QUENCH, and
* ICMP_PARAMETERPROB.
*/
@@ -810,7 +810,8 @@ static bool icmp_unreach(struct sk_buff *skb)
if (iph->ihl < 5) /* Mangled header, drop. */
goto out_err;
- if (icmph->type == ICMP_DEST_UNREACH) {
+ switch (icmph->type) {
+ case ICMP_DEST_UNREACH:
switch (icmph->code & 15) {
case ICMP_NET_UNREACH:
case ICMP_HOST_UNREACH:
@@ -846,8 +847,16 @@ static bool icmp_unreach(struct sk_buff *skb)
}
if (icmph->code > NR_ICMP_UNREACH)
goto out;
- } else if (icmph->type == ICMP_PARAMETERPROB)
+ break;
+ case ICMP_PARAMETERPROB:
info = ntohl(icmph->un.gateway) >> 24;
+ break;
+ case ICMP_TIME_EXCEEDED:
+ __ICMP_INC_STATS(net, ICMP_MIB_INTIMEEXCDS);
+ if (icmph->code == ICMP_EXC_FRAGTIME)
+ goto out;
+ break;
+ }
/*
* Throw it at our lower layers
--
2.13.6
next reply other threads:[~2017-10-12 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-12 14:12 Matteo Croce [this message]
2017-10-14 18:05 ` [PATCH net-next] icmp: don't fail on fragment reassembly time exceeded 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=20171012141237.2209-1-mcroce@redhat.com \
--to=mcroce@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--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).