From: Christoph Grenz <christophg+lkml@grenz-bonn.de>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Destination Options question
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 02:59:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98532586.q66oQjG9bA@cg-notebook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10108598.co7siHb18S@cg-notebook>
Hi Tom,
I narrowed the issue down to a possible bug in the kernel-side IPv6 checksum
calculation:
A raw socket for IPPROTO_MH has checksum calculation/verification enabled by
default (as if setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_CHECKSUM, 4) was used).
I get different checksums for the same packet with and without IPV6_DSTOPTS
ancillary data. The checksum is independent of the content of the Destination
Options, but adding multiple IPV6_DSTOPTS anciliary data items changes the
calculated checksum, even if the resulting packet is otherwise identical.
The checksum verification then discards the packets on the receiving side,
which is why I didn't get any packets on my IPPROTO_MH socket and suspected a
problem on the receiving side first.
When I calculate the checksum in userspace and set the IPV6_CHECKSUM socket
option to -1 to disable the in-kernel calculation on the sending side, I
receive all packets as expected.
It doesn't happen with IPV6_HOPOPTS or IPV6_RTHDR ancillary data, at least as
far as I checked.
Could you take a look at it before I submit a bug report?
Best regards
Christoph
Am Samstag, 14. Dezember 2019, 22:11:01 CET schrieb Christoph Grenz:
> Hi Tom,
>
> my receive code boils down to this Python script:
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> #!/usr/bin/env python3
>
> from socket import socket, AF_INET6, IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_RECVDSTOPTS,
> SOCK_RAW
>
> IPPROTO_MH = 135 # IPv6 Mobility Header
>
> sock = socket(AF_INET6, SOCK_RAW, IPPROTO_MH)
> sock.setsockopt(IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_RECVDSTOPTS, True)
>
> sock.bind(('::', 0))
>
> while True:
> packet, ancdata, msg_flags, address = sock.recvmsg(1800, 512)
> print(address[0], packet.hex(), ancdata)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Best regards,
> Christoph
>
> Am Samstag, 14. Dezember 2019, 12:40:16 CET schrieb Tom Herbert:
> > On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 8:19 AM Christoph Grenz
> >
> > <christophg+lkml@grenz-bonn.de> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I'm playing around with Mobile IPv6 and noticed a strange behaviour in
> > > the
> > > Linux network system when using IPv6 destination options:
> > >
> > > I'm able to send destination options on SOCK_DGRAM and SOCK_RAW sockets
> > > with sendmsg() and IPV6_DSTOPTS ancillary data. The sent packets also
> > > look correct in Wireshark.
> > >
> > > But I'm not able to receive packets with destination options on a socket
> > > with the IPV6_RECVDSTOPTS socket option enabled. Both a packet with a
> > > Home Address Option and a packet with an empty destination options
> > > header
> > > (only containing padding) won't be received on a socket for the payload
> > > protocol.
> >
> > Christoph, Can you post your receive code?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > > Only a SOCK_RAW socket for IPPROTO_DSTOPTS receives the packet.
> > >
> > > I tested this on a vanilla 5.4.0 kernel and got the same behaviour.
> > > Activating dyndbg for everything in net/ipv6 didn't produce any relevant
> > > output in dmesg.
> > >
> > > Is this expected behaviour or a bug? Or do I maybe need some other
> > > socket
> > > option or a xfrm policy to receive packets with destination options?
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > > Christoph
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-16 1:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-14 16:11 IPv6 Destination Options question Christoph Grenz
2019-12-14 20:40 ` Tom Herbert
2019-12-14 21:11 ` Christoph Grenz
2019-12-16 1:59 ` Christoph Grenz [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=98532586.q66oQjG9bA@cg-notebook \
--to=christophg+lkml@grenz-bonn.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom@herbertland.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).