Re: IPSEC: "bad checksum"

2010-01-22 Thread Adriaan
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Toni Mueller wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 21.01.2010 at 21:48:01 +, Christian Weisgerber > wrote: >> Toni Mueller wrote: >> > today I see tons of these on a 4.6-stable/amd64 machine (sample): >> > 17:21:00.848135 esp 1.1.1.1 > 2.2.2.2 spi 0x54d46678 seq 132642 l

Re: IPSEC: "bad checksum"

2010-01-22 Thread Toni Mueller
Hi, On Thu, 21.01.2010 at 21:48:01 +, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Toni Mueller wrote: > > today I see tons of these on a 4.6-stable/amd64 machine (sample): > > 17:21:00.848135 esp 1.1.1.1 > 2.2.2.2 spi 0x54d46678 seq 132642 len 84 > > (DF) (ttl 64, id 49897, len 104, bad cksum 0! differs

Re: IPSEC: "bad checksum"

2010-01-21 Thread Christian Weisgerber
Toni Mueller wrote: > today I see tons of these on a 4.6-stable/amd64 machine (sample): > > 17:21:00.848135 esp 1.1.1.1 > 2.2.2.2 spi 0x54d46678 seq 132642 len 84 > (DF) (ttl 64, id 49897, len 104, bad cksum 0! differs by 8b3c) This looks like outgoing packets on an interface that does IPv4 hea

IPSEC: "bad checksum"

2010-01-21 Thread Toni Mueller
Hi, today I see tons of these on a 4.6-stable/amd64 machine (sample): 17:21:00.848135 esp 1.1.1.1 > 2.2.2.2 spi 0x54d46678 seq 132642 len 84 (DF) (ttl 64, id 49897, len 104, bad cksum 0! differs by 8b3c) 17:21:00.859630 esp 2.2.2.2 > 1.1.1.1 spi 0x87b9932c seq 89638 len 324 (ttl 46, id 63366, l