| Message ID | 1346946815-3094-1-git-send-email-nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 11:53 -0400, Nicolas Dichtel wrote: > It's the same problem that previous fix about blackhole and prohibit routes. > > When adding a throw route, it was handled like a classic route. > Moreover, it was only possible to add this kind of routes by specifying > an interface. > > Before the patch: > $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 > RTNETLINK answers: No such device > $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 dev eth0 > $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 > 2001::2 dev eth0 metric 1024 > > After: > $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 > $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 > throw 2001::2 dev lo metric 1024 error -11 > > Reported-by: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi> > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> > --- > net/ipv6/route.c | 9 ++++++++- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> Thanks Nicolas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 11:53:35 -0400 > It's the same problem that previous fix about blackhole and prohibit routes. > > When adding a throw route, it was handled like a classic route. > Moreover, it was only possible to add this kind of routes by specifying > an interface. > > Before the patch: > $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 > RTNETLINK answers: No such device > $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 dev eth0 > $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 > 2001::2 dev eth0 metric 1024 > > After: > $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 > $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 > throw 2001::2 dev lo metric 1024 error -11 > > Reported-by: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi> > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> Applied, thanks. See how easy this was to implement via ->rtm_type? :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Le 07/09/2012 20:18, David Miller a écrit : > From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> > Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 11:53:35 -0400 > >> It's the same problem that previous fix about blackhole and prohibit routes. >> >> When adding a throw route, it was handled like a classic route. >> Moreover, it was only possible to add this kind of routes by specifying >> an interface. >> >> Before the patch: >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 >> RTNETLINK answers: No such device >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 dev eth0 >> $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 >> 2001::2 dev eth0 metric 1024 >> >> After: >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 >> $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 >> throw 2001::2 dev lo metric 1024 error -11 >> >> Reported-by: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi> >> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> > > Applied, thanks. > > See how easy this was to implement via ->rtm_type? :-) > Definitely! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel <at> 6wind.com> writes: > > Le 07/09/2012 20:18, David Miller a écrit : > > From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel <at> 6wind.com> > > Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 11:53:35 -0400 > > > >> It's the same problem that previous fix about blackhole and prohibit routes. > >> > >> When adding a throw route, it was handled like a classic route. > >> Moreover, it was only possible to add this kind of routes by specifying > >> an interface. > >> > >> Before the patch: > >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 > >> RTNETLINK answers: No such device > >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 dev eth0 > >> $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 > >> 2001::2 dev eth0 metric 1024 > >> > >> After: > >> $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 > >> $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 > >> throw 2001::2 dev lo metric 1024 error -11 > >> > >> Reported-by: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg <at> iki.fi> > >> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel <at> 6wind.com> > > > > Applied, thanks. Although 'ip -6 route show' now reports a "throw" instead of an "unreachable" route the behavior of a configured IPv6 "throw" route still seems incorrect and similar to that of an "unreachable" route! I've tested with kernel 3.7.4 which includes this patch: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git;a=commitdiff;h=ef2c7d7b59708d54213c7556a82d14de9a7e4475 An example scenario using a dedicated routing table (IMHO the main use case for throw routes) is given below... greetings /axel The following scenario shows an example: computer 1001 and 1002 connected via ethernet eth2 computer 1002 has 1001:2::2/64 on eth2 Now at computer 1001: root@mlc1001:~# ping6 1001:2::2 -c 1 connect: Network is unreachable root@mlc1001:~# ip a add 1001:2::1/64 dev eth2 root@mlc1001:~# ip -6 rule add from all lookup 10 pref 1000 root@mlc1001:~# ip -6 rule 0: from all lookup local 1000: from all lookup 10 32766: from all lookup main root@mlc1001:~# ip -6 route list table 10 root@mlc1001:~# ping6 1001:2::2 -c 1 PING 1001:2::2(1001:2::2) 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1001:2::2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.263 ms --- 1001:2::2 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.263/0.263/0.263/0.000 ms root@mlc1001:~# ip -6 route add throw 1001:2::/64 table 10 root@mlc1001:~# ip -6 route list table 10 throw 1001:2::/64 dev lo metric 1024 error -11 root@mlc1001:~# ping6 1001:2::2 -c 1 connect: Resource temporarily unavailable # Although the destination lookup should only be thrown for table 10 # and continue on the main table where a valid local route exists # it fails. For remote throw routes the error says something like: # From 1001:2::2 icmp_seq=1 Destination unreachable: No route # Removing the throw route again it works again... root@mlc1001:~# ip -6 r 1001:2::/64 dev eth2 proto kernel metric 256 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 fe80::/64 dev eth1 proto kernel metric 256 fe80::/64 dev eth2 proto kernel metric 256 root@mlc1001:~# ip -6 route del throw 1001:2::/64 table 10 root@mlc1001:~# ping6 1001:2::2 -c 1 PING 1001:2::2(1001:2::2) 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1001:2::2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.264 ms --- 1001:2::2 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.264/0.264/0.264/0.000 ms root@mlc1001:~# ip -6 r 1001:2::2 via 1001:2::2 dev eth2 metric 0 cache 1001:2::/64 dev eth2 proto kernel metric 256 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 fe80::/64 dev eth1 proto kernel metric 256 fe80::/64 dev eth2 proto kernel metric 256 root@mlc1001:~# -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c index fa26444..339d921 100644 --- a/net/ipv6/route.c +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c @@ -1471,6 +1471,9 @@ int ip6_route_add(struct fib6_config *cfg) case RTN_PROHIBIT: rt->dst.error = -EACCES; break; + case RTN_THROW: + rt->dst.error = -EAGAIN; + break; default: rt->dst.error = -ENETUNREACH; break; @@ -2275,7 +2278,8 @@ static int rtm_to_fib6_config(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh, if (rtm->rtm_type == RTN_UNREACHABLE || rtm->rtm_type == RTN_BLACKHOLE || - rtm->rtm_type == RTN_PROHIBIT) + rtm->rtm_type == RTN_PROHIBIT || + rtm->rtm_type == RTN_THROW) cfg->fc_flags |= RTF_REJECT; if (rtm->rtm_type == RTN_LOCAL) @@ -2412,6 +2416,9 @@ static int rt6_fill_node(struct net *net, case -EACCES: rtm->rtm_type = RTN_PROHIBIT; break; + case -EAGAIN: + rtm->rtm_type = RTN_THROW; + break; default: rtm->rtm_type = RTN_UNREACHABLE; break;
It's the same problem that previous fix about blackhole and prohibit routes. When adding a throw route, it was handled like a classic route. Moreover, it was only possible to add this kind of routes by specifying an interface. Before the patch: $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 RTNETLINK answers: No such device $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 dev eth0 $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 2001::2 dev eth0 metric 1024 After: $ ip route add throw 2001::2/128 $ ip -6 route | grep 2001::2 throw 2001::2 dev lo metric 1024 error -11 Reported-by: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> --- net/ipv6/route.c | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)