Ermal Luçi writes:
> The existing sate of the world i think there will be checksum issues
> again especially in policy routing situations.
You mean if a packet is destined for an interface that has offloading
enabled, but pf decides to reroute it to an interface that doesn't? I
don't know how th
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Ermal Luçi writes:
> > Also this only affects the traffic sourced by the host itself and not
> > forwarded traffic and I think this patch will provide a regression for
> > the issues that the committed patch does.
>
> How?
>
The code
Ermal Luçi writes:
> Also this only affects the traffic sourced by the host itself and not
> forwarded traffic and I think this patch will provide a regression for
> the issues that the committed patch does.
How?
The code as it stands (after your commit) is incorrect and will trigger
an assertio
Hello Dag,
if its working for you i have no issues.
For me these changes are taken into consideration during policy routing on
pf(4).
If you check the pf_route() call it does the same checks as outgoing
processing of the modules.
If they need to be considered after pf(4) does it internal processin
Here's a patch that doesn't crash and tries not to break TSO.
Index: sys/netpfil/pf/pf_ioctl.c
===
--- sys/netpfil/pf/pf_ioctl.c (revision 274791)
+++ sys/netpfil/pf/pf_ioctl.c (working copy)
@@ -3576,9 +3576,10 @@
int chk
Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> This is wrong, and causes a panic with some network adapters (vtnet, for
> one). It is closely related to 192013 and should not have been
> committed without consulting me first. Please revert, or just #if 0 out
> the entire block since the old code is even more wro
Ermal LuXXi writes:
> Log:
> pf(4) needs to have a correct checksum during its processing.
> Calculate checksums for the IPv6 path when needed before
> delving into pf(4) code as required.
>
> PR: 172648, 179392
> Reviewed by:glebius@
> Approved by:gnn@
> Obtained from
Author: eri
Date: Wed Nov 19 13:31:08 2014
New Revision: 274709
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/274709
Log:
pf(4) needs to have a correct checksum during its processing.
Calculate checksums for the IPv6 path when needed before
delving into pf(4) code as required.
PR:
