From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
To: Mike Manning <mmanning@vyatta.att-mail.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] vrf: allow simultaneous service instances in default and other VRFs
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 14:16:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4b9bf1c2-b157-f93c-7380-d5437d8eae7b@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181001084320.32453-1-mmanning@vyatta.att-mail.com>
On 10/1/18 2:43 AM, Mike Manning wrote:
> Services currently have to be VRF-aware if they are using an unbound
> socket. One cannot have multiple service instances running in the
> default and other VRFs for services that are not VRF-aware and listen
> on an unbound socket. This is because there is no way of isolating
> packets received in the default VRF from those arriving in other VRFs.
>
> This series provides this isolation subject to the existing kernel
> parameter net.ipv4.tcp_l3mdev_accept not being set, given that this is
> documented as allowing a single service instance to work across all
> VRF domains. The functionality applies to UDP & TCP services, for IPv4
> and IPv6, in particular adding VRF table handling for IPv6 multicast.
>
I see 1 failure caused by this patch set: IPv6/UDP send to a peer's
linklocal address with no server on port in the peer. An ICMP
unreachable is expected since there is no server and it is not received.
Happens with or without net.ipv4.udp_l3mdev_accept set.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-03 3:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-01 8:43 [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] vrf: allow simultaneous service instances in default and other VRFs Mike Manning
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 01/10] net: allow binding socket in a VRF when there's an unbound socket Mike Manning
2018-10-02 19:39 ` David Ahern
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 02/10] net: ensure unbound stream socket to be chosen when not in a VRF Mike Manning
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 03/10] net: ensure unbound datagram " Mike Manning
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 04/10] net: provide a sysctl raw_l3mdev_accept for raw socket lookup with VRFs Mike Manning
2018-10-02 19:39 ` David Ahern
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 05/10] net: fix raw socket lookup device bind matching " Mike Manning
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 06/10] net: IP[V6]_MULTICAST_IF constraint on unbound socket if VRFs present Mike Manning
2018-10-02 19:59 ` David Ahern
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 07/10] vrf: mark skb for multicast or link-local as enslaved to VRF Mike Manning
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 08/10] ipv6: allow ping to link-local address in VRF Mike Manning
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 09/10] ipv6: handling of multicast packets received " Mike Manning
2018-10-01 8:43 ` [PATCH net-next v2 10/10] ipv6: do not drop vrf udp multicast packets Mike Manning
2018-10-02 20:16 ` David Ahern [this message]
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=4b9bf1c2-b157-f93c-7380-d5437d8eae7b@gmail.com \
--to=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=mmanning@vyatta.att-mail.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).