[sisyphus] un-def и nat
Anton Gorlov
stalker на altlinux.ru
Сб Окт 13 11:48:01 MSK 2012
а вот кажется и ответ. в 3.6.2 типа пофиксили
commit 52fc5048534e9d4127622fa5a269a92f3bb5218b
Author: Eric Dumazet <edumazet на google.com>
Date: Thu Oct 4 01:25:26 2012 +0000
ipv4: add a fib_type to fib_info
[ Upstream commit f4ef85bbda96324785097356336bc79cdd37db0a ]
commit d2d68ba9fe8 (ipv4: Cache input routes in fib_info nexthops.)
introduced a regression for forwarding.
This was hard to reproduce but the symptom was that packets were
delivered to local host instead of being forwarded.
David suggested to add fib_type to fib_info so that we dont
inadvertently share same fib_info for different purposes.
With help from Julian Anastasov who provided very helpful
hints, reproduced here :
<quote>
Can it be a problem related to fib_info reuse
from different routes. For example, when local IP address
is created for subnet we have:
broadcast 192.168.0.255 dev DEV proto kernel scope link src
192.168.0.1
192.168.0.0/24 dev DEV proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.1
local 192.168.0.1 dev DEV proto kernel scope host src 192.168.0.1
The "dev DEV proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.1" is
a reused fib_info structure where we put cached routes.
The result can be same fib_info for 192.168.0.255 and
192.168.0.0/24. RTN_BROADCAST is cached only for input
routes. Incoming broadcast to 192.168.0.255 can be cached
and can cause problems for traffic forwarded to 192.168.0.0/24.
So, this patch should solve the problem because it
separates the broadcast from unicast traffic.
And the ip_route_input_slow caching will work for
local and broadcast input routes (above routes 1 and 3) just
because they differ in scope and use different fib_info.
</quote>
Many thanks to Chris Clayton for his patience and help.
Reported-by: Chris Clayton <chris2553 на googlemail.com>
Bisected-by: Chris Clayton <chris2553 на googlemail.com>
Reported-by: Dave Jones <davej на redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet на google.com>
Cc: Julian Anastasov <ja на ssi.bg>
Tested-by: Chris Clayton <chris2553 на googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem на davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh на linuxfoundation.org>
10.10.2012 14:42, Anton Gorlov пишет:
> А никто не замечал что с un-def порой snat не работает?
> Симптомы следующие - на локальном интерфейсе вижу приходящие пакеты с
> адресом из локальной сети,на исходящем вижу уже отначенные пакеты и
> ответные на них.а вот на локальном уже ответных пакетов не видно.
> С 1 стороны pppoe до провайдера, с другой локалка по обычному эзернету.
> Причём порой всё таки работает после перезагрузки
> _______________________________________________
> Sisyphus mailing list
> Sisyphus на lists.altlinux.org
> https://lists.altlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/sisyphus
Подробная информация о списке рассылки Sisyphus