From: David Ahern <dsa@cumulusnetworks.com>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>, Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: [WireGuard] Source address fib invalidation on IPv6
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 15:14:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <31e050e2-0499-a77e-f698-86e58ad2fa6b@cumulusnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9qi7_C7c=wsZg=EwBg3jzFzVmW1eiFGGXgcX8fCcOOZcA@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/11/16 12:29 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> If I'm replying to a UDP packet, I generally want to use a source
> address that's the same as the destination address of the packet to
> which I'm replying. For example:
>
> Peer A sends packet: src = 10.0.0.1, dst = 10.0.0.3
> Peer B replies with: src = 10.0.0.3, dst = 10.0.0.1
>
> But let's complicate things. Let's say Peer B has multiple IPs on an
> interface: 10.0.0.2, 10.0.0.3. The default route uses 10.0.0.2. In
> this case what do you think should happen?
>
> Case 1:
> Peer A sends packet: src = 10.0.0.1, dst = 10.0.0.3
> Peer B replies with: src = 10.0.0.2, dst = 10.0.0.1
>
> Case 2:
> Peer A sends packet: src = 10.0.0.1, dst = 10.0.0.3
> Peer B replies with: src = 10.0.0.3, dst = 10.0.0.1
>
> Intuition tells me the answer is "Case 2". If you agree, keep reading.
> If you disagree, stop reading here, and instead correct my poor
> intuition.
>
> So, assuming "Case 2", when Peer B receives the first packet, he notes
> that packet's destination address, so that he can use it as a source
> address next. When replying, Peer B sets the stored source address and
> calls the routing function:
>
> struct flowi4 fl = {
> .saddr = from_daddr_of_previous_packet,
> .daddr = from_saddr_of_previous_packet,
> };
> rt = ip_route_output_flow(sock_net(sock), &fl, sock);
>
> What if, however, by the time Peer B chooses to reply, his interface
> no longer has that source address? No problem, because
> ip_route_output_flow will return -EINVAL in that case. So, we can do
> this:
>
> struct flowi4 fl = {
> .saddr = from_daddr_of_previous_packet,
> .daddr = from_saddr_of_previous_packet,
> };
> rt = ip_route_output_flow(sock_net(sock), &fl, sock);
> if (unlikely(IS_ERR(rt))) {
> fl.saddr = 0;
> rt = ip_route_output_flow(sock_net(sock), &fl, sock);
> }
>
> And then all is good in the neighborhood. This solution works. Done.
>
> But what about IPv6? That's where we get into trouble:
>
> struct flowi6 fl = {
> .saddr = from_daddr_of_previous_packet,
> .daddr = from_saddr_of_previous_packet,
> };
> ret = ipv6_stub->ipv6_dst_lookup(sock_net(sock), sock, &dst, &fl);
>
> In this case, IPv6 returns a valid dst, when no interface has the
> source address anymore! So, there's no way to know whether or not the
> source address for replying has gone stale. We don't have a means of
> falling back to inaddr_any for the source address.
What do you mean by 'valid dst'? ipv6 returns net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry on lookup failures so yes dst is non-NULL but that does not mean the lookup succeeded.
For example take a look at ip6_dst_lookup_tail():
if (!*dst)
*dst = ip6_route_output_flags(net, sk, fl6, flags);
err = (*dst)->error;
if (err)
goto out_err_release;
perhaps I should add dst->error to the fib tracepoints ...
>
> Primary question: is this behavior a bug? Or is this some consequence
> of a fundamental IPv6 difference with v4? Or is something else
> happening here?
>
> Thanks,
> Jason
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-11 22:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-11 19:29 Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-11 22:14 ` David Ahern [this message]
2016-11-12 2:18 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-12 15:40 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-12 18:14 ` David Ahern
2016-11-12 19:08 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-13 0:43 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-13 0:51 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-11-13 1:00 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-13 13:23 ` [WireGuard] [PATCH] ip6_output: ensure flow saddr actually belongs to device Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-13 16:30 ` David Ahern
2016-11-13 19:02 ` [WireGuard] [PATCH v2] " Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-13 20:45 ` David Ahern
2016-11-13 23:28 ` [WireGuard] [PATCH v3] " Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-14 1:36 ` [WireGuard] Debugging AllowedIps John Huttley
2016-11-14 1:39 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-14 2:28 ` John Huttley
2016-11-14 2:59 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-14 3:10 ` John Huttley
2016-11-14 16:19 ` [WireGuard] [PATCH v3] ip6_output: ensure flow saddr actually belongs to device David Ahern
[not found] ` <CAHmME9p6-mLSs84AwwfRXe8U3Z2sy6Dp9W9H0gKh0rcZuQAfZA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAHmME9qC4xqGOwJnauXrJBDkAtmmuJ+kJKL6ufuU9_XWKNFdSA@mail.gmail.com>
2016-11-14 16:54 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-14 16:44 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-11-14 16:55 ` David Ahern
2016-11-14 17:04 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-11-14 17:17 ` David Ahern
2016-11-14 17:33 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-11-14 17:48 ` David Ahern
2016-11-14 18:33 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-11-15 0:45 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-15 14:45 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-11-15 15:26 ` David Ahern
2016-11-13 20:19 ` [WireGuard] [PATCH] " Jason A. Donenfeld
2016-11-13 20:39 ` David Ahern
2016-11-13 0:51 ` [WireGuard] Source address fib invalidation on IPv6 Jason A. Donenfeld
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=31e050e2-0499-a77e-f698-86e58ad2fa6b@cumulusnetworks.com \
--to=dsa@cumulusnetworks.com \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.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.
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).