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=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, 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 97668C07E9C for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 15:59:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 811AB61C33 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 15:59:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232063AbhGGQCW (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2021 12:02:22 -0400 Received: from wtarreau.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:57312 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231915AbhGGQCV (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2021 12:02:21 -0400 Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 167FxUKe002271; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 17:59:30 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 17:59:30 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Eric Dumazet Cc: "David S . Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , netdev , Eric Dumazet , Maciej Zenczykowski Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: tcp: drop silly ICMPv6 packet too big messages Message-ID: <20210707155930.GE1978@1wt.eu> References: <20210707154630.583448-1-eric.dumazet@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210707154630.583448-1-eric.dumazet@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Hi Eric, On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:46:30AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > From: Eric Dumazet > > While TCP stack scales reasonably well, there is still one part that > can be used to DDOS it. > > IPv6 Packet too big messages have to lookup/insert a new route, > and if abused by attackers, can easily put hosts under high stress, > with many cpus contending on a spinlock while one is stuck in fib6_run_gc() Just thinking loud, wouldn't it make sense to support randomly dropping such packets on input (or even better rate-limit them) ? After all, if a host on the net feels like it will need to send one, it will surely need to send a few more until one is taken into account so it's not dramatic. And this could help significantly reduce their processing cost. Willy