Re: Question: should local address be expired when updating PMTU?

[Sheng Yong <shengyong1@huawei.com>]

On 3/30/2015 6:32 PM, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:37:46AM +0800, shengyong wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 2015/2/5 15:21, Steffen Klassert 写道:
>>> On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 09:59:54AM +0800, shengyong wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, the later. I test it on 3.10-stable. It can fix this problem. So maybe this is a bug?
>>>
>>> Yes, it's a bug.
>>>
>>>> And the 3 approaches (different flags are used: RTF_LOCAL, IFF_LOOPBACK and RTF_CACHE) in
>>>> these mails can fix the expire of local address. I'm confused about these flags:
>>>> * RTF_LOCAL: the entries of local address, like address binded to the native NIC
>>>> * RTF_CACHE: all cached entries
>>>> * IFF_LOOPBACK: this is a device-related flag, which has the same meaning as RTF_LOCAL
>>>>
>>>> Am I right? If so, I think RTF_LOCAL is appropriate, because we just want entries of local
>>>> addresses to be not expired and we don't care other entries (I think if they get expired,
>>>> a neigh discovery could find them back).
>>>
>>> It is not the address that expires, it is the learned PMTU value that
>>> expires. If we delete an uncached route, nothing will bring it back
>>> unless you readd it manually.
>>>
>>> We need to ensure that all routes that can learn something what
>>> expires are cached. This means that we clone the inserted route
>>> when it is used for the first time. The learned values are stored
>>> at this cloned route. If the learned value expires, the clone is
>>> deleted. The original route remains in the fib tree and can be
>>> still looked up.
>>>
>>> The problem is, that we currently don't cache/clone host routes.
>>> So if a host route learns something that expires, the original
>>> route is removed from the fib tree and we loose connectivity
>>> to that host. We don't cache host routes because some of them
>>> (the local ones) are automatically added with metric 0.
>>> If we try to cache such a route, the clone will be identical
>>> to the original route and we fail to insert it to the fib tree.
>>>
>>> So we need to adjust the caching to all routes that actually can
>>> learn something and leave out only those that can not.
>>>
>>> I'll send a patchset that should fix this at the beginning of the
>>> next week.
>> Hi, Steffen
>> Is this patchset ready? It seems that I didn't find it in the mainling
>> list. If it is ready, I can test it to see if it solves the problem I
>> met :)
> 
> I finally end up with a patchset that passed all your testcases.
> I'll send it in reply to this mail, please test it.
> 
I just test the patchset, and it can solve the problem I met.
Thanks very much,
Sheng

> Thanks!
> 
> .
>