From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF9FC4727E for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:57:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78B52207C3 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:57:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="SX7S5BhB" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729516AbgI3L5L (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 07:57:11 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37822 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725776AbgI3L5L (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 07:57:11 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x52d.google.com (mail-ed1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F4B8C061755 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:57:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id e22so1512188edq.6 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:57:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=OhPAOFVD+oBF810acOneFFKHLt/2svGol3+xfPNIIGc=; b=SX7S5BhBtHRfXy7vaCEcReg+6OvyNUQchq6BO11lbTwHnyGUefzIv7nRnMzMNbsSKR pCCrsuh7mqbYggWGR2An30iH6BT8veb307Te+15ozNRGB4FS64T/y1bACG0cf9jD/l3Y Ctn1c+AsIZS9JVuGWSp5qZKnxxZbbElOYYhBBMJfjiXAkA/O+s9pkhX5oaHqa+apAyPl 4JseFTzHgH/OScZVd81uuy4GdtnUY52Tl7PdKDe5YtDHYxkwV3wuWLLQLhOHJ1JAwsqG KPjtq3AS/qzPchB5DWZJsDWLAgLeb2sui58UISIxs2E5ocD1M3JiogmzKjfzd56uEGW/ ccRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=OhPAOFVD+oBF810acOneFFKHLt/2svGol3+xfPNIIGc=; b=S/F5/LAR/obprjZ0VoSXbWy8fBVkmPPgM7UPSiP+KsyrmVXlgnV6G++hueFHEfLHFz MjHFi+DxI5PhamADAY/bORN99d6RQYOQajh2aYXTcXUFTF3nfOP086Bs/n+TdhaRr8IP U71tG/thSmsLuBOEVYV8KjO1iSleWhwRd4EZMG/kmDG/AKWFzz1aPSS0Zwz7Z2YiJysQ 24cti+SllzCCZaQ2XisHKp73WjFSu2Ee+Rnngl4DNITtAcdn3BP4GvmOcMornG3wWMY+ YWoZ3c+rA9lqHoO+90Sjjq80fchkYP5yjQEk5TuFknEFy8xM47xfV/6DBmO4W2dMQoCF rX6w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532nQqPgIOYZyB0kHnNB5WNMvVSSE7x5ljT40JX+lCxQSbAEU74v 52EQ8gyjhYt2d4Vc3EDY1vU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxtwwrK5r1kYDrb89gNS4vHLe5bTncIfmd5BEQuq8+hhTAVP3F9nof+uaQ3Zdml552291h3wA== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:cd90:: with SMTP id x16mr2235767edv.302.1601467029812; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fido.de.innominate.com (x59cc8adf.dyn.telefonica.de. [89.204.138.223]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id rn10sm866118ejb.8.2020.09.30.04.57.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:57:06 +0200 From: Peter Vollmer To: Vladimir Oltean Cc: Network Development Subject: Re: dsa/mv88e6xxx: leaking packets on MV88E6341 switch Message-ID: <20200930115705.GA12758@fido.de.innominate.com> References: <20200930102835.4ee4mogk7ogom35j@skbuf> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200930102835.4ee4mogk7ogom35j@skbuf> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 01:28:35PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:09:03PM +0200, Peter Vollmer wrote: > > lan0..lan3 are members of the br0 bridge interface. > > and so is eth0, I assume? No, eth0 is a dedicated interface with its own IP. We have routing between eth0 and br0. root@mGuard:~# ip link 1: lo: mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue qlen 1000 link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 2: eth0: mtu 1500 qdisc mq qlen 1024 link/ether a8:74:1d:85:08:be brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 3: eth1: mtu 1508 qdisc mq qlen 1024 link/ether 00:a0:45:38:22:90 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 4: sit0@NONE: mtu 1480 qdisc noop qlen 1000 link/sit 0.0.0.0 brd 0.0.0.0 5: lan0@eth1: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue master br0 qlen 1000 link/ether a8:74:1d:85:08:bf brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 6: lan1@eth1: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue master br0 qlen 1000 link/ether a8:74:1d:85:08:c0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 7: lan2@eth1: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue master br0 qlen 1000 link/ether a8:74:1d:85:08:c1 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 8: lan3@eth1: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue master br0 qlen 1000 link/ether a8:74:1d:85:08:c2 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 9: br0: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue qlen 1000 link/ether a8:74:1d:85:08:bf brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff root@mGuard:~# brctl show bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces br0 8000.a8741d8508bf no lan2 lan0 lan3 lan1 > > The problem is that for ICMP ping lan0-> eth0, ICMP ping request > > packets are leaking (i.e. flooded) to all other ports lan1..lan3, > > while the ping reply eth0->lan0 arrives correctly at lan0 without any > > leaked packets on lan1..lan3. > > What are you pinging exactly, the IP of the eth0 interface, or a station > connected to the eth0 which is part of the same bridge as the lan ports? > I am pinging the address of a station connected to eth0 from a station connected to switch port lan0. Thanks, Peter