From: David Newall <davidn@davidnewall.com>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@gnu.org>,
Bart De Schuymer <bdschuym@pandora.be>
Cc: Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Bad checksum on bridge with IP options
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 23:49:30 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5370D872.8080901@davidnewall.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140512135141.GA13945@breakpoint.cc>
On 12/05/14 23:21, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Agree, bridge should not alter ip options.
It would be easy to remove the call to ip_options_compile instead of
recalculating checksum after it, but I suspect there may be good reasons
why this, too, would be wrong. The source file is br_netfilter.c,
suggesting that a change in options is needed in some situations.
In the situation that caught my attention, it obviously does it wrong
(probably didn't add 0.0.0.0 to the route record, probably just
incremented the pointer; and seriously damaged the timestamps as well as
an incremented pointer without actually adding a value.)
I'm in a quandary.
Is it possible that bridge has exceeded it's mandate? I can't find it
now, but I saw a comment that it just copies packets unchanged. I think
it's use now goes further than that would allow.
I welcome words of advice.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-12 14:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-11 14:41 Bad checksum on bridge with IP options David Newall
2014-05-11 19:42 ` Lukas Tribus
2014-05-12 8:14 ` David Newall
2014-05-12 10:15 ` Lukas Tribus
2014-05-12 10:25 ` David Newall
2014-05-12 10:31 ` Lukas Tribus
2014-05-12 10:48 ` David Newall
2014-05-12 13:23 ` David Newall
2014-05-12 13:51 ` Florian Westphal
2014-05-12 14:19 ` David Newall [this message]
2014-05-12 18:54 ` Lukas Tribus
2014-05-12 23:46 ` David Newall
2014-05-14 13:08 ` David Newall
2014-05-16 14:33 ` Revert 462fb2af9788a82a534f8184abfde31574e1cfa0 (bridge : Sanitize skb before it enters the IP stack) David Newall
2014-05-16 15:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-05-16 15:23 ` David Newall
2014-05-16 15:24 ` David Newall
2014-05-19 12:58 ` David Newall
2014-05-19 14:01 ` Florian Westphal
2014-05-19 14:19 ` David Newall
2014-05-19 17:09 ` Florian Westphal
2014-05-19 20:49 ` Bart De Schuymer
2014-05-21 7:49 ` David Newall
2014-05-21 18:51 ` Bart De Schuymer
2014-05-21 20:18 ` David Miller
2014-05-22 18:57 ` Bart De Schuymer
2014-05-24 18:00 ` David Miller
2014-05-24 5:56 ` David Newall
2014-05-24 17:43 ` David Miller
2014-05-25 2:32 ` David Newall
2014-05-25 3:02 ` David Miller
2014-05-25 6:37 ` David Newall
2014-05-27 8:55 ` David Laight
2014-05-29 22:34 ` David Miller
2014-05-30 9:17 ` David Newall
2014-05-31 0:46 ` David Miller
2014-05-31 6:13 ` David Newall
2014-05-31 6:37 ` David Miller
2014-05-22 3:50 ` David Newall
2014-05-22 18:57 ` Bart De Schuymer
2014-05-20 3:57 ` David Newall
2014-05-20 4:55 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2014-05-20 16:05 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-05-21 8:10 ` David Newall
2014-05-21 20:14 ` David Miller
2014-05-22 20:06 ` Bandan Das
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=5370D872.8080901@davidnewall.com \
--to=davidn@davidnewall.com \
--cc=bdschuym@pandora.be \
--cc=buytenh@gnu.org \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--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).