From: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat•com>
To: "Linus Lüssing" <linus.luessing@web•de>
Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org, Florian Westphal <fwestpha@redhat•com>,
bridge@lists•linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: bridge is not forwaring ICMP6 neighbor solicitation to KVM guest
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 03:45:18 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1519668985.2363287.1394610318371.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140312043740.GS5090@Linus-Debian>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Linus Lüssing" <linus.luessing@web•de>
> To: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat•com>
> Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org, "Florian Westphal" <fwestpha@redhat•com>, bridge@lists•linux-foundation.org
> Sent: Wednesday, 12 March, 2014 5:37:40 AM
> Subject: Re: bridge is not forwaring ICMP6 neighbor solicitation to KVM guest
>
> Hi Jan,
>
> Hope your bridge-snooping related issues are resolved with the two
> new patches present in net. If not just let me/us know. Thanks
> again for the detailed and helpful reporting!
Hi,
looks good, I wasn't able to reproduce this issue after I applied
patches you posted recently.
Regards,
Jan
>
> Cheers, Linus
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:57:52AM -0500, Jan Stancek wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Linus Lüssing" <linus.luessing@web•de>
> > > To: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat•com>
> > > Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org, "Florian Westphal" <fwestpha@redhat•com>,
> > > bridge@lists•linux-foundation.org
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 5 March, 2014 3:27:07 PM
> > > Subject: Re: bridge is not forwaring ICMP6 neighbor solicitation to KVM
> > > guest
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > >
> > > > I hand-crafted one new packet from malformed one used in previous
> > > > tests.
> > > > I modified source address from :: to host B link-scope address and
> > > > changed
> > > > dst address from ff02::1 to ff02::1:ffaa:aaaa
> > >
> > > Okay, again according to your capture the guest is receiving the
> > > MLD query on its interface but does not react with an MLD report.
> > >
> > > Two things I'd like to know:
> > >
> > > Is using the link-scope address as a source and "ff02::1" as the
> > > destination address for the MLD query work for you?
> >
> > Yes, I could not trigger it with such query:
> > http://jan.stancek.eu/tmp/neigh_solicit_and_bridge_traces2/guest_mld_query_ff02_1.cap
> > frame 795 -> query
> > frame 1040 -> MLD report from guest
> > ~20 seconds later
> > frame 1507, 1508 -> neigh solicit/advert
> > frame 1580, 1581 -> neigh solicit/advert
> >
> > >
> > > Is using the link-scope address as a source and "ff02::1:ff00:29"
> > > as the destination address for the MLD query "work" for you (do
> > > we see an MLD report from the guest and keep on seeing neighbor
> > > solicitations from host B then?).
> >
> > Yes, this also worked (though I received 2 reports):
> > http://jan.stancek.eu/tmp/neigh_solicit_and_bridge_traces2/guest_mld_query_ff02_1_ff0029.cap
> > frame 446 -> query
> > frame 448 -> MLD report from guest
> > frame 465 -> MLD report from guest
> > frame 689, 690 -> neigh solicit/advert
> > frame 760, 761 -> neigh solicit/advert
> > ...
> >
> > Both host and guest were running 3.14.0-rc5 with your sanity check patch.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jan
> >
> > >
> > > For the latter, I don't see anything in particular filtering these
> > > for a general MLD query wrong destination address in the IPv6
> > > code from igmp6_event_query() on. But I suspect that the query
> > > doesn't even get that far on the kernel of the guest, as it is not
> > > listening on ff02::1:ffaa:aaaa. Therefore the test with
> > > "ff02::1:ff00:29", an address the guest is listening on, would be
> > > interesting.
> > >
> > > If that works, then I'm going to make a patch ignore General MLD
> > > Queries without ff02::1 as their destination address, too.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hm, looking at more checks in igmp6_event_query(), I'm currently
> > > wondering whether we should only enable the snooping behaviour in
> > > the bridge when receiving a General MLD Query, so one with "::" in
> > > the multicast field of the MLD message, instead of activating it
> > > upon a Multicast-Address-Specific Query, too. That'd seem more
> > > sane to me, I'm going to make a patch for that tomorrow.
> > >
> > > Cheers, Linus
> > >
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-12 7:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1566805413.12693479.1393872931017.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
2014-03-03 19:47 ` bridge is not forwaring ICMP6 neighbor solicitation to KVM guest Jan Stancek
2014-03-03 21:27 ` Linus Lüssing
2014-03-03 21:40 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-03-03 23:03 ` Linus Lüssing
2014-03-03 22:45 ` Jan Stancek
2014-03-04 0:00 ` Linus Lüssing
2014-03-04 8:02 ` Jan Stancek
2014-03-04 10:52 ` Linus Lüssing
2014-03-04 11:06 ` Jan Stancek
2014-03-04 21:37 ` Linus Lüssing
2014-03-05 12:10 ` Jan Stancek
2014-03-05 14:27 ` Linus Lüssing
2014-03-05 14:57 ` Jan Stancek
2014-03-12 4:37 ` Linus Lüssing
2014-03-12 7:45 ` Jan Stancek [this message]
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=1519668985.2363287.1394610318371.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
--to=jstancek@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=bridge@lists$(echo .)linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fwestpha@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=linus.luessing@web$(echo .)de \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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