Subject: Re: [BUG] VPN broken in net-next

From: Stephen Hemminger <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 16:41:14 -0800

On Wed, 2 Mar 2011 16:28:26 -0800
Stephen Hemminger <[email-masked]> wrote:

> My PPTP VPN is broken with net-next tree, it works fine with 2.6.38-rc6
> but not in the next tree. Bisected the problem down to the following commit.
> 
> Debugging to see which address request is failing with the new code.
> 
> 9435eb1cf0b76b323019cebf8d16762a50a12a19 is the first bad commit
> commit 9435eb1cf0b76b323019cebf8d16762a50a12a19
> Author: David S. Miller <[email-masked]>
> Date:   Fri Feb 18 12:43:09 2011 -0800
> 
>     ipv4: Implement __ip_dev_find using new interface address hash.
>     
>     Much quicker than going through the FIB tables.
>     
>     Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email-masked]>
> 
> :040000 040000 265fa1882ee3430f74d59c9b38b6aca0858396d6 28a01a4941f99f7c266fd84f36cc27b933d426c1 M	net
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to [email-masked]
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

__ip_dev_find is being called with 10.250.0.105 and failing.
At the time the route tables are:

When VPN is up, the following is in the local table:

local 10.250.0.105 dev ppp0  proto kernel  scope host  src 10.250.0.105 

and it isn't getting matched...

In main table the difference is:
+10.255.254.0 dev ppp0  proto kernel  scope link  src 10.250.0.105 
-default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth0  proto static