Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Reply-To: nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] openvswitch: support asymmetric conntrack
To:     Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@ovn.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, dev@openvswitch.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20191108210714.12426-1-aconole@redhat.com>
 <eb0bdc35-7f29-77c7-c013-e88f74772c24@6wind.com>
 <f7tsgmkyja6.fsf@dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com>
From:   Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
Organization: 6WIND
Message-ID: <57c14a3f-25fa-76c3-d846-a616f198467e@6wind.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Nov 2019 09:22:18 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f7tsgmkyja6.fsf@dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Le 18/11/2019 à 22:19, Aaron Conole a écrit :
> Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> writes:
> 
>> Le 08/11/2019 à 22:07, Aaron Conole a écrit :
>>> The openvswitch module shares a common conntrack and NAT infrastructure
>>> exposed via netfilter.  It's possible that a packet needs both SNAT and
>>> DNAT manipulation, due to e.g. tuple collision.  Netfilter can support
>>> this because it runs through the NAT table twice - once on ingress and
>>> again after egress.  The openvswitch module doesn't have such capability.
>>>
>>> Like netfilter hook infrastructure, we should run through NAT twice to
>>> keep the symmetry.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 05752523e565 ("openvswitch: Interface with NAT.")
>>> Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> In this case, ovs_ct_find_existing() won't be able to find the
>> conntrack, right?
> 
> vswitchd normally won't allow both actions to get programmed.  Even the
> kernel module won't allow it, so this really will only happen when the
> connection gets established via the nf_hook path, and then needs to be
> processed via openvswitch.  In those cases, the tuple lookup should be
> correct, because the nf_nat table should contain the correct tuple data,
> and the skbuff should have the correct tuples in the packet data to
> begin with.
> 
>> Inverting the tuple to find the conntrack doesn't work anymore with double NAT.
>> Am I wrong?
> 
> I think since the packet was double-NAT on the way out (via nf_hook
> path), then the incoming reply will have the correct NAT tuples and the
> lookup will happen just fine.  Just that during processing, both
> transformations aren't applied.
Ok, I didn't look deeply, thank you for the explanation.

Regards,
Nicolas