Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754977AbZINN5I (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:57:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753405AbZINN5H (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:57:07 -0400 Received: from gw1.cosmosbay.com ([212.99.114.194]:50915 "EHLO gw1.cosmosbay.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753000AbZINN5G (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:57:06 -0400 Message-ID: <4AAE4BAF.2010406@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:57:03 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephan von Krawczynski CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, Linux Netdev List Subject: Re: ipv4 regression in 2.6.31 ? References: <20090914150935.cc895a3c.skraw@ithnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20090914150935.cc895a3c.skraw@ithnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (gw1.cosmosbay.com [0.0.0.0]); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:57:03 +0200 (CEST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2399 Lines: 58 Stephan von Krawczynski a ?crit : > Hello all, > > today we experienced some sort of regression in 2.6.31 ipv4 implementation, or > at least some incompatibility with former 2.6.30.X kernels. > > We have the following situation: > > ---------- vlan1@eth0 192.168.2.1/24 > / > host A 192.168.1.1/24 eth0 ------- host B > \ > ---------- eth1 192.168.3.1/24 > > > Now, if you route 192.168.1.0/24 via interface vlan1@eth0 on host B and let > host A ping 192.168.2.1 everything works. But if you route 192.168.1.0/24 via > interface eth1 on host B and let host A ping 192.168.2.1 you get no reply. > With tcpdump we see the icmp packets arrive at vlan1@eth0, but no icmp echo > reply being generated neither on vlan1 nor eth1. > Kernels 2.6.30.X and below do not show this behaviour. > Is this intended? Do we need to reconfigure something to restore the old > behaviour? > Asymetric routing ? Check your rp_filter settings grep . `find /proc/sys/net -name rp_filter` rp_filter - INTEGER 0 - No source validation. 1 - Strict mode as defined in RFC3704 Strict Reverse Path Each incoming packet is tested against the FIB and if the interface is not the best reverse path the packet check will fail. By default failed packets are discarded. 2 - Loose mode as defined in RFC3704 Loose Reverse Path Each incoming packet's source address is also tested against the FIB and if the source address is not reachable via any interface the packet check will fail. Current recommended practice in RFC3704 is to enable strict mode to prevent IP spoofing from DDos attacks. If using asymmetric routing or other complicated routing, then loose mode is recommended. conf/all/rp_filter must also be set to non-zero to do source validation on the interface Default value is 0. Note that some distributions enable it in startup scripts. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/