Re: [nox-dev] Handling corrupted TCP header
Fwiw, I agree with what both Masa and KK.
Masa's point: OFPP_TABLE shouldn't be a special case: i.e., it should
be able to generate packet_in's on the second pss
KK's point: this should be more explicitly called out in the spec.
I think if you were to suggest a specific wording in the next week,
this could still make it into the 1.1 spec.
- Rob
.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Masayoshi Kobayashi
mkoba...@stanford.edu wrote:
KK,
I think the implementer will read the spec the other way around.
Spec requires nothing special about OFPP_TABLE action (it does not say
don't generate pkt_in, if there is no match). So the switch
just follows the default behavior, i.e., pkt_in will be generated.
I would expect the reference design also does the same.
Masa
On 01/13/2011 06:38 PM, kk yap wrote:
Because the action of pkt_out is OFPP_TABLE.
(the packet in pkt_out does not match to the entry that is installed by
flow_mod, since the matching entry says nw_proto=0).
Is there anything in the spec that says that the switch should send
another packet-in if there is no matching entry for a OFPP_TABLE? I
am failing to find that. Can someone point to why this behavior is
specified by the spec?
Regards
KK
On 13 January 2011 18:28, Masayoshi Kobayashimkoba...@stanford.edu
wrote:
KK,
I thought about it a little. Why is the switch doing step 7?
Because the action of pkt_out is OFPP_TABLE.
(the packet in pkt_out does not match to the entry that is installed by
flow_mod, since the matching entry says nw_proto=0).
Masa
On 01/13/2011 06:06 PM, kk yap wrote:
Hi Srini,
I thought about it a little. Why is the switch doing step 7?
Anyway, I do agree that NOX is not handling malformed packets right.
I have included an invalid field in the struct flow, and created a
component that ignore invalid packets. If anyone will double-check
and test the patches attached, I will push it.
Regards
KK
On 13 January 2011 16:13, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu
wrote:
I explained this to KK in person. For others, here is the sequence of
events:
1. Packet arrives with (nw_proto=6, tp_src=0, tp_dst=0). Store in bufid
'X'
2. flow.cc identifies that the arrived TCP packet is corrupted, and
generates
pkt_in event with flow structure having (nw_proto=0, tp_src=0,
tp_dst=0)
3. Authenticator generates a flow_in with flow_in.flow being same as
above
3. routing.cc generates a flow_mod for the flow_in with the match
pattern
defined using the fields of the flow_in.flow
4. Switch inserts a flow table entry for matching (nw_proto=0,
tp_src=0, tp_dst=0)
5. routing.cc generates a pkt_out for the bufid 'X' with action =
OFPP_TABLE
6. Switch notices that the packet in bufid 'X' has no matching flow
table
entry,
because there is a mismatch on the nw_proto field
7. Switch generates a new pkt_in event
8. Go to step (2)
This is the infinite loop.
Srini.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:08 PM, kk yapyap...@stanford.edu wrote:
Hi Srini,
I think you are fixing this in the wrong place. Putting nw_proto=0
does not cause an infinite loop. Where is the loop happening? Can
you provide more detailed NOX output so that we can even start looking
at this.
Regards
KK
On 13 January 2011 11:02, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu
wrote:
We don't know who sent it, but it came from outside our network. If
it
is easy to take down a network by just sending 1 invalid packet, I'd
be worried!
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, kk yapyap...@stanford.edu
wrote:
Hi Srini,
What is this packet? The length of TCP is zero?!?! I wish to
understand the circumstance for which we are getting the packet
before
commenting on the right way to handle this.
Regards
KK
On 13 January 2011 10:38, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu
wrote:
When someone sends the attached packet to a switch, it generates an
infinite loop of packet_ins in our production network. This is
because
this incoming tcp packet has nw_proto=6 and tcp port numbers of
0,
but outgoing flow_mod has nw_proto of 0 and tcp port numbers of
0.
So, the packet_out generates a new packet_in and this loop
continues
forever.
I see the following code in src/lib/flow.cc (both in NOX-Zaku and
SNAC). I believe this is what is causing the nw_proto to be 0 in
the
flow_mod. I'm not sure who wrote that piece of code. This is not
handling corrupted packets well and rejecting this packet as a
invalid
TCP packet. Does anyone see problems with removing the else
clause?
if (nw_proto == ip_::proto::TCP) {
const tcp_header *tcp = pull_tcp(b);
if (tcp) {
tp_src = tcp-tcp_src;
tp_dst = tcp-tcp_dst;
} else {
/* Avoid tricking other code into thinking that
* this packet has an L4 header. */
nw_proto = 0;
}
}
FYI, pull_tcp is defined as below:
static const tcp_header * pull_tcp(Buffer b)
Re: [nox-dev] Handling corrupted TCP header
Okay, I think the high level point is we should expose malformed
packets and let others decide how to handle it. Can someone review
this patch before I push?
Regards
KK
On 14 January 2011 01:25, Rob Sherwood rob.sherw...@stanford.edu wrote:
Fwiw, I agree with what both Masa and KK.
Masa's point: OFPP_TABLE shouldn't be a special case: i.e., it should
be able to generate packet_in's on the second pss
KK's point: this should be more explicitly called out in the spec.
I think if you were to suggest a specific wording in the next week,
this could still make it into the 1.1 spec.
- Rob
.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Masayoshi Kobayashi
mkoba...@stanford.edu wrote:
KK,
I think the implementer will read the spec the other way around.
Spec requires nothing special about OFPP_TABLE action (it does not say
don't generate pkt_in, if there is no match). So the switch
just follows the default behavior, i.e., pkt_in will be generated.
I would expect the reference design also does the same.
Masa
On 01/13/2011 06:38 PM, kk yap wrote:
Because the action of pkt_out is OFPP_TABLE.
(the packet in pkt_out does not match to the entry that is installed by
flow_mod, since the matching entry says nw_proto=0).
Is there anything in the spec that says that the switch should send
another packet-in if there is no matching entry for a OFPP_TABLE? I
am failing to find that. Can someone point to why this behavior is
specified by the spec?
Regards
KK
On 13 January 2011 18:28, Masayoshi Kobayashimkoba...@stanford.edu
wrote:
KK,
I thought about it a little. Why is the switch doing step 7?
Because the action of pkt_out is OFPP_TABLE.
(the packet in pkt_out does not match to the entry that is installed by
flow_mod, since the matching entry says nw_proto=0).
Masa
On 01/13/2011 06:06 PM, kk yap wrote:
Hi Srini,
I thought about it a little. Why is the switch doing step 7?
Anyway, I do agree that NOX is not handling malformed packets right.
I have included an invalid field in the struct flow, and created a
component that ignore invalid packets. If anyone will double-check
and test the patches attached, I will push it.
Regards
KK
On 13 January 2011 16:13, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu
wrote:
I explained this to KK in person. For others, here is the sequence of
events:
1. Packet arrives with (nw_proto=6, tp_src=0, tp_dst=0). Store in bufid
'X'
2. flow.cc identifies that the arrived TCP packet is corrupted, and
generates
pkt_in event with flow structure having (nw_proto=0, tp_src=0,
tp_dst=0)
3. Authenticator generates a flow_in with flow_in.flow being same as
above
3. routing.cc generates a flow_mod for the flow_in with the match
pattern
defined using the fields of the flow_in.flow
4. Switch inserts a flow table entry for matching (nw_proto=0,
tp_src=0, tp_dst=0)
5. routing.cc generates a pkt_out for the bufid 'X' with action =
OFPP_TABLE
6. Switch notices that the packet in bufid 'X' has no matching flow
table
entry,
because there is a mismatch on the nw_proto field
7. Switch generates a new pkt_in event
8. Go to step (2)
This is the infinite loop.
Srini.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:08 PM, kk yapyap...@stanford.edu wrote:
Hi Srini,
I think you are fixing this in the wrong place. Putting nw_proto=0
does not cause an infinite loop. Where is the loop happening? Can
you provide more detailed NOX output so that we can even start looking
at this.
Regards
KK
On 13 January 2011 11:02, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu
wrote:
We don't know who sent it, but it came from outside our network. If
it
is easy to take down a network by just sending 1 invalid packet, I'd
be worried!
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, kk yapyap...@stanford.edu
wrote:
Hi Srini,
What is this packet? The length of TCP is zero?!?! I wish to
understand the circumstance for which we are getting the packet
before
commenting on the right way to handle this.
Regards
KK
On 13 January 2011 10:38, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu
wrote:
When someone sends the attached packet to a switch, it generates an
infinite loop of packet_ins in our production network. This is
because
this incoming tcp packet has nw_proto=6 and tcp port numbers of
0,
but outgoing flow_mod has nw_proto of 0 and tcp port numbers of
0.
So, the packet_out generates a new packet_in and this loop
continues
forever.
I see the following code in src/lib/flow.cc (both in NOX-Zaku and
SNAC). I believe this is what is causing the nw_proto to be 0 in
the
flow_mod. I'm not sure who wrote that piece of code. This is not
handling corrupted packets well and rejecting this packet as a
invalid
TCP packet. Does anyone see problems with removing the else
clause?
if (nw_proto == ip_::proto::TCP) {
const tcp_header *tcp = pull_tcp(b);
if (tcp) {
tp_src = tcp-tcp_src;
tp_dst = tcp-tcp_dst;
Re: [nox-dev] pytopology patch
I haven't used git-am. What format does it expect the patch to be in? I usually do the following: $ cd nox $ patch -p1 path/to/patch/pytopology_destiny.patch -/\/ On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:39 AM, kk yap yap...@stanford.edu wrote: Hi Nikhil, That did not work. ykk@kk-alien:~$ git am pytopology_destiny.patch Patch format detection failed. Regards KK On 13 January 2011 20:44, Martin Casado cas...@nicira.com wrote: Awesome, thanks Nikhil. Hi, I have added 2 new functions to pytopology that makes it more useful/usable: * get_datapaths() : returns a list of all datapathids in the network * get_neighbors(dpid) : returns a list of neighbors of a given datapathid. I've attached a patch for the destiny branch (commit no. 5917f412d6d2a23ce5373ec499872cb8b40833e8). Thanks, Nikhil ___ nox-dev mailing list nox-dev@noxrepo.org http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org -- ~~~ Martin Casado Nicira Networks, Inc. www.nicira.com | www.openvswitch.org cell: 650-776-1457 ~~~ ___ nox-dev mailing list nox-dev@noxrepo.org http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org ___ nox-dev mailing list nox-dev@noxrepo.org http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org
Re: [nox-dev] pytopology patch
Please use git-format-patch. Regards KK On 14 January 2011 10:52, Nikhil Handigol nikh...@cs.stanford.edu wrote: I haven't used git-am. What format does it expect the patch to be in? I usually do the following: $ cd nox $ patch -p1 path/to/patch/pytopology_destiny.patch -/\/ On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:39 AM, kk yap yap...@stanford.edu wrote: Hi Nikhil, That did not work. ykk@kk-alien:~$ git am pytopology_destiny.patch Patch format detection failed. Regards KK On 13 January 2011 20:44, Martin Casado cas...@nicira.com wrote: Awesome, thanks Nikhil. Hi, I have added 2 new functions to pytopology that makes it more useful/usable: * get_datapaths() : returns a list of all datapathids in the network * get_neighbors(dpid) : returns a list of neighbors of a given datapathid. I've attached a patch for the destiny branch (commit no. 5917f412d6d2a23ce5373ec499872cb8b40833e8). Thanks, Nikhil ___ nox-dev mailing list nox-dev@noxrepo.org http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org -- ~~~ Martin Casado Nicira Networks, Inc. www.nicira.com | www.openvswitch.org cell: 650-776-1457 ~~~ ___ nox-dev mailing list nox-dev@noxrepo.org http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org ___ nox-dev mailing list nox-dev@noxrepo.org http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org
Re: [nox-dev] Handling corrupted TCP header
Hi KK The patch looks right. I will push that to SNAC too. Thanks Srini. On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:47 AM, kk yap yap...@stanford.edu wrote: Okay, I think the high level point is we should expose malformed packets and let others decide how to handle it. Can someone review this patch before I push? Regards KK On 14 January 2011 01:25, Rob Sherwood rob.sherw...@stanford.edu wrote: Fwiw, I agree with what both Masa and KK. Masa's point: OFPP_TABLE shouldn't be a special case: i.e., it should be able to generate packet_in's on the second pss KK's point: this should be more explicitly called out in the spec. I think if you were to suggest a specific wording in the next week, this could still make it into the 1.1 spec. - Rob . On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Masayoshi Kobayashi mkoba...@stanford.edu wrote: KK, I think the implementer will read the spec the other way around. Spec requires nothing special about OFPP_TABLE action (it does not say don't generate pkt_in, if there is no match). So the switch just follows the default behavior, i.e., pkt_in will be generated. I would expect the reference design also does the same. Masa On 01/13/2011 06:38 PM, kk yap wrote: Because the action of pkt_out is OFPP_TABLE. (the packet in pkt_out does not match to the entry that is installed by flow_mod, since the matching entry says nw_proto=0). Is there anything in the spec that says that the switch should send another packet-in if there is no matching entry for a OFPP_TABLE? I am failing to find that. Can someone point to why this behavior is specified by the spec? Regards KK On 13 January 2011 18:28, Masayoshi Kobayashimkoba...@stanford.edu wrote: KK, I thought about it a little. Why is the switch doing step 7? Because the action of pkt_out is OFPP_TABLE. (the packet in pkt_out does not match to the entry that is installed by flow_mod, since the matching entry says nw_proto=0). Masa On 01/13/2011 06:06 PM, kk yap wrote: Hi Srini, I thought about it a little. Why is the switch doing step 7? Anyway, I do agree that NOX is not handling malformed packets right. I have included an invalid field in the struct flow, and created a component that ignore invalid packets. If anyone will double-check and test the patches attached, I will push it. Regards KK On 13 January 2011 16:13, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu wrote: I explained this to KK in person. For others, here is the sequence of events: 1. Packet arrives with (nw_proto=6, tp_src=0, tp_dst=0). Store in bufid 'X' 2. flow.cc identifies that the arrived TCP packet is corrupted, and generates pkt_in event with flow structure having (nw_proto=0, tp_src=0, tp_dst=0) 3. Authenticator generates a flow_in with flow_in.flow being same as above 3. routing.cc generates a flow_mod for the flow_in with the match pattern defined using the fields of the flow_in.flow 4. Switch inserts a flow table entry for matching (nw_proto=0, tp_src=0, tp_dst=0) 5. routing.cc generates a pkt_out for the bufid 'X' with action = OFPP_TABLE 6. Switch notices that the packet in bufid 'X' has no matching flow table entry, because there is a mismatch on the nw_proto field 7. Switch generates a new pkt_in event 8. Go to step (2) This is the infinite loop. Srini. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:08 PM, kk yapyap...@stanford.edu wrote: Hi Srini, I think you are fixing this in the wrong place. Putting nw_proto=0 does not cause an infinite loop. Where is the loop happening? Can you provide more detailed NOX output so that we can even start looking at this. Regards KK On 13 January 2011 11:02, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu wrote: We don't know who sent it, but it came from outside our network. If it is easy to take down a network by just sending 1 invalid packet, I'd be worried! On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM, kk yapyap...@stanford.edu wrote: Hi Srini, What is this packet? The length of TCP is zero?!?! I wish to understand the circumstance for which we are getting the packet before commenting on the right way to handle this. Regards KK On 13 January 2011 10:38, Srini Seetharamanseeth...@stanford.edu wrote: When someone sends the attached packet to a switch, it generates an infinite loop of packet_ins in our production network. This is because this incoming tcp packet has nw_proto=6 and tcp port numbers of 0, but outgoing flow_mod has nw_proto of 0 and tcp port numbers of 0. So, the packet_out generates a new packet_in and this loop continues forever. I see the following code in src/lib/flow.cc (both in NOX-Zaku and SNAC). I believe this is what is causing the nw_proto to be 0 in the flow_mod. I'm not sure who wrote that piece of code. This is not handling corrupted packets well and rejecting this packet as a invalid TCP packet. Does anyone see problems with removing the else clause? if (nw_proto ==
