Now icmp_reply is only called by icmp_echo and icmp_timestamp ip_send_reply is only called by tcp_v4_send_reset and tcp_v4_send_ack
I think in all situations the ip_hdr(skb)->saddr is set and should be the destination of reply packets. If using rt->rt_src as destination is correct in some situation, can anyone give me a example? I think perhaps it is a copy and paste from code like ip_build_and_send_pkt, but reply packets in these situations (icmp_echo and icmp_timestamp and tcp_v4_send_ack and tcp_v4_send_reset) is diffrent, I think we can just use ip_hdr(skb)->saddr as destination address. On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 09:35:09PM -0700, David Stevens wrote: > I'm not sure why it's using rt_src here, but there are relevant cases that > your description doesn't cover. For example, what happens if the source > is not set in the original packet? Does NAT affect this? > > You quote RFC text for ICMP echo and the case where the receiving machine > is the final destination, but you're modifying code that is used for all > ICMP > types and used for ICMP errors generated when acting as an intermediate > router. > > In ordinary cases, and certainly with ICMP echo when the source is set in > the original packet and no rewriting is going on (and the address is not > spoofed), > using the original source as the destination is fine. But have you tested > or > considered the other cases? > > +-DLS > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
