From: g1pi@libero.it
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Cc: g1pi@libero.it
Subject: Re: [musl] dns resolution failure in virtio-net guest
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 08:51:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZdG3AX1yiXRoohrY@moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240217184534.GI4163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 01:45:34PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> [...]
>
> UDP is "allowed" to drop packets any time for any reason, but that
> doesn't mean it's okay to do so in the absence of a good reason, or
> that musl should work around bugs where that happens, especially when
> they're not a fundamental part of Linux but a particular
> virtualization configuration.
I expected the network to drop a UDP packet anywhere, just not at the
boundary between kernel-space and user-space: it's gratuitously rude.
I agree a workaround is not worth the effort, although I suspect such
a configuration to be more common than not.
>
> I suggest you run tcpdump on the host and watch what's happening, and
> I suspect you'll find this is qemu's virtio network being... qemu. It
> probably does not do any real NAT, but directly rewrites source and
> destination addresses so that your local caching DNS sees *two
> identical queries* (same source/dest host/port combination, same query
> id) and treats the second as a duplicated packet and ignores it. Or it
> may be something different, but at least inspecting the actual network
> traffic coming out of the qemu process will tell you what's going on.
>
On the host side all is fine: the cache log shows that it receives the
request and replies correctly, and tcpdump agrees. I had already
checked that.
But tcpdump on the guest side surprised me:
Good case -- 16 msec delay before second sendto()
7:32:44.332 IP 10.0.2.15.43276 > 10.0.2.2.53: 33452+ A? example.com. (29)
7:32:44.333 IP 10.0.2.2.53 > 10.0.2.15.43276: 33452 1/0/0 A 93.184.216.34 (45)
7:32:44.349 IP 10.0.2.15.43276 > 192.168.1.123.53: 33452+ A? example.com. (29)
Bad case -- rushing the sendto()s
7:32:55.358 IP 10.0.2.15.46537 > 10.0.2.2.53: 33452+ A? example.com. (29)
7:32:55.358 IP 10.0.2.15.46537 > 192.168.1.123.53: 33452+ A? example.com. (29)
7:32:55.358 IP *127.0.0.1*.53 > 10.0.2.15.46537: 33452 1/0/0 A 93.184.216.34 (45)
The response packet does arrive, but has wrong src host. Same behaviour
in linux and bsd guests.
I believe you guessed correctly that this is a bug in qemu, just more
interesting than I initially thought. Most likely it's in the
virtio-net driver, which was ported also to the BSDs. Any suggestion
about how to report it?
g.b.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-18 12:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-17 11:08 g1pi
2024-02-17 18:45 ` Rich Felker
2024-02-18 7:51 ` g1pi [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZdG3AX1yiXRoohrY@moon \
--to=g1pi@libero.it \
--cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).