On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 17:45:44 -0700
Cong Wang <cw...@twopensource.com> wrote:
> I think vti (v4 and v6) tunnel needs to fix as well?
1) vti:
Well, probably it needs a fix, but:
a) I don't know a scenario when vti4_err would be called, ah4/esp4/ipcomp4
should handle icmp errors. vti_err was removed in aba826958830 but (don't know
why, maybe someone can explain?) vti4_err was introduced back in df3893c176e9.
b) vti uses complex routing through xfrm, see pt. 2).
2) ah4/esp/ipcomp:
They probably have a problem with ipv4_{update_pmtu,redirect} too, because
ah4/esp/ipcomp use xfrm policies for correct routing, but ipv4_{update_pmtu,
redirect} implementation do not xfrm_lookup. Moreover, the whole
ipv4_*_{update_pmtu, redirect} family looks like using __ip_route_output_key
which doesn't do xfrm_lookup, except ipv4_sk_update_pmtu which does it through
ip_route_output_flow. I also do not understand ideas behind it, but I am not
so familiar with xfrm stuff, so feel free to correct me.
Also ah4/esp/ipcomp use oif=0 for ipv4_{update_pmtu,redirect} which should work
well with most setups (and wrong oif !=0 like in ipip/sit doesn't work), so I
don't think it's a big problem.
3) gre:
There are 2 gre protocols in kernel: pptp(drivers/net/ppp/pptp.c) and
cisco/ipgre(net/ipv4/gre_demux.c).
Pptp simply ignores ICMP errors, I'd simply let it be.
ipgre is a framework for subprotos which doesn't work with tunnel devices by
itself (see net/ipv4/gre_demux.c:gre_cisco_err). Although it uses
skb->dev->ifindex for ipv4_{update_pmtu,redirect} which might be wrong for hosts
with asymmetric routing, this is not a big deal, because tunnels bound to
device
will not work with asymmetric routing anyway. So I think it is okay.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
