From: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com>
To: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com>
Cc: Petr Machata <pmachata@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Peter Dawson <petedaws@gmail.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] selftests: forwarding: vxlan_bridge_1d: fix tos value
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 11:40:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r1ytpkdu.fsf@mellanox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200217025904.GP2159@dhcp-12-139.nay.redhat.com>
Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 11:54:09AM +0100, Petr Machata wrote:
>> >> > After commit 71130f29979c ("vxlan: fix tos value before xmit") we start
>> >> > strict vxlan xmit tos value by RT_TOS(), which limits the tos value less
>> >>
>> >> I don't understand how it is OK to slice the TOS field like this. It
>> >> could contain a DSCP value, which will be mangled.
>> >
>> > Thanks for this remind. I re-checked the tos definition and found a summary
>> > from Peter Dawson[1].
>> >
>> > IPv4/6 Header:0 |0 1 2 3 |0 1 2 3 |0 1 2 3 |0 1 2 3 |
>> > RFC2460(IPv6) |Version | Traffic Class | |
>> > RFC2474(IPv6) |Version | DSCP |ECN| |
>> > RFC2474(IPv4) |Version | IHL | DSCP |ECN|
>> > RFC1349(IPv4) |Version | IHL | PREC | TOS |X|
>> > RFC791 (IPv4) |Version | IHL | TOS |
>> >
>> > According to this I think our current IPTOS_TOS_MASK should be updated to 0xFC
>> > based on RFC2474. But I'm not sure if there will have compatibility issue.
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> Looking at the various uses of RT_TOS, it looks like they tend to be
>> used in tunneling and routing code. I think that in both cases it makes
>> sense to convert to 0xfc. But I'm not ready to vouch for this :)
>
> Yes, I also could not... Maybe David or Daniel could help give some comments?
>
>>
>> What is the problem that commit 71130f29979c aims to solve? It's not
>> clear to me from the commit message. What issues arise if the TOS is
>> copied as is?
>
> As the commit said, we should not use config tos directly. We should remove
> the precedence field based on RFC1349 or ENC field based on RFC2474.
Well, RFC1349 didn't know about DSCP. I do not think it is possible to
conform to both RFC1349 and RFC2474 at the same time.
RFC2474 states that "DS field [...] is intended to supersede the
existing definitions of the IPv4 TOS octet [RFC791] and the IPv6 Traffic
Class octet [IPv6]". So the field should be assumed to contain DSCP from
that point on. In my opinion, that makes commit 71130f29979c incorrect.
(And other similar uses of RT_TOS in other tunneling devices likewise.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-17 10:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-13 9:40 [PATCH net] selftests: forwarding: vxlan_bridge_1d: fix tos value Hangbin Liu
2020-02-13 12:52 ` Petr Machata
2020-02-14 2:53 ` Hangbin Liu
2020-02-14 10:54 ` Petr Machata
2020-02-17 2:59 ` Hangbin Liu
2020-02-17 10:40 ` Petr Machata [this message]
2020-02-18 2:05 ` Hangbin Liu
2020-02-18 3:01 ` David Miller
2020-02-18 8:00 ` Hangbin Liu
2020-02-17 2:57 ` David Miller
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=87r1ytpkdu.fsf@mellanox.com \
--to=petrm@mellanox.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=idosch@mellanox.com \
--cc=liuhangbin@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=petedaws@gmail.com \
--cc=pmachata@gmail.com \
/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).