public inbox for netdev@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Ahern <dsa@cumulusnetworks•com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission•com>
Cc: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini05@gmail•com>,
	netdev <netdev@vger•kernel.org>,
	Shrijeet Mukherjee <shm@cumulusnetworks•com>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@cumulusnetworks•com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@cumulusnetworks•com>,
	jtoppins@cumulusnetworks•com, nikolay@cumulusnetworks•com,
	ddutt@cumulusnetworks•com,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion•org>,
	Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind•com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber•org>,
	hadi@mojatatu•com, David Miller <davem@davemloft•net>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 3/6] net: Introduce VRF device driver - v2
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 12:42:35 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55A0121B.8090408@cumulusnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wpy84nlb.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>

On 7/9/15 10:56 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> I have given specific areas of concern, and explained myself and you are
> blowing me off.

You have not had answered my question with any additional details or 
code references -- ie., a specific example. Asking you for clarification 
and details is not blowing you off.

To recap:

Eric: "With respect to sockets there is also the issue that ip addresses 
are not per vrf."

David: "IP addresses are per interface and interfaces are uniquely 
assigned to a VRF so why do you think IP addresses are not per VRF?"

Eric: "I have read large swaths of the linux networking code over the 
years. Further I was thinking more about non-local addresses ip 
addresses, but I would not be surprised if there are also issues with 
local addresses."

David: "Well, if someone has a specific example I'll take a look."

So, let me try this again: All of the IPv4 and IPv6 addresses I am aware 
of are held in structs linked to a specific netdevice. Can you give me a 
specific example of what you mean here? I can't respond to your feedback 
based on the little information you have given me.

>
> Besides the fragment reassembly and xfrm there are things like the
> ineetpeer cache.

noted.

>
>>>>>    Which means things like packet fragmentation reassembly
>>>>> can easily do the wrong thing.  Similarly things like the xfrm for ipsec
>>>>> tunnels are not hooked into this mix.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I really do not see how this VRF/MRF thing as designed can support
>>>>> general purpose sockets.  I am not certain it can correctly support any
>>>>> kind of socket except perhaps SOCK_RAW.
>>>>
>>>> Sockets bound to the VRF device work properly. Why do you think they won't?
>>>
>>> Because there are many locations in the network stack (like fragment
>>> reassembly) that make the assumption that ip addresses are unique and
>>> do not bother looking at network device or anything else.  If fragments
>>> manage to come into play I don't expect it would be hard to poision a
>>> connections with fragments from another routing domain with overlapping
>>> ip addresses.
>>
>> If that is true it is a problem with the networking stack today and is
>> completely independent of this VRF proposal.
>
> Not at all.  It is required functionality for reassembly of ip fragments
> when the packets come in via different paths.  This is required to
> support multi-path ip reception.
>
> This only becomes a bug in the scenario you have proposed.

Can you please point to a specific line in one of these patches that 
impacts fragmentation?

This patch -- patch 3 -- adds a VRF driver. It has not mucked with 
packets at all.

Patch 4 (again I have a better split in a forthcoming revision) tweaks a 
few places in the IPv4 stack with respect to socket lookups (dif 
modified) and FIB table lookups (specifying a table to use or tweaking 
oif/iif).

Since the VRF device has not touched the packet and does not introduce a 
tunnel how has its use/existence impacted fragmentation?

I do plan tests to include ipsec for example and fragmentation; it's a 
matter of time. If you have suggestions on a setup/test case I should 
include please let me know.

David

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-10 18:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-06 15:03 [RFC net-next 0/6] Proposal for VRF-lite - v2 David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:03 ` [RFC net-next 1/6] fib: export symbols David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:03 ` [RFC net-next 2/6] net: Preparation for vrf device David Ahern
2015-07-08  8:37   ` Nicolas Dichtel
2015-07-08  8:40     ` Nicolas Dichtel
2015-07-08 16:10     ` David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:03 ` [RFC net-next 3/6] net: Introduce VRF device driver - v2 David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:42   ` Nicolas Dichtel
2015-07-06 16:37   ` Nikolay Aleksandrov
2015-07-06 16:46     ` David Ahern
2015-07-08  9:27   ` Nicolas Dichtel
2015-07-08 16:38     ` David Ahern
2015-07-08 18:34   ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-07-09 17:19     ` David Ahern
2015-07-09 17:28       ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-07-10  1:36         ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-07-10  2:12           ` David Ahern
2015-07-10  3:55             ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-07-10  4:20               ` David Ahern
2015-07-10  4:56                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-07-10 18:42                   ` David Ahern [this message]
2015-07-10  2:39         ` David Ahern
2015-07-10  3:28           ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-07-10  3:44             ` David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:03 ` [RFC net-next 4/6] net: Modifications to ipv4 stack for VRF devices David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:03 ` [RFC net-next 5/6] net: Add sk_bind_dev_if to task_struct David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:03 ` [RFC net-next 6/6] net: Add chvrf command David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:03 ` [RFC PATCH] iproute2: Add support for VRF device David Ahern
2015-07-06 15:40 ` [RFC net-next 0/6] Proposal for VRF-lite - v2 Nicolas Dichtel
2015-07-06 17:53   ` Shrijeet Mukherjee
2015-07-08  9:30     ` Nicolas Dichtel
2015-07-10  5:14 ` Scott Feldman

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=55A0121B.8090408@cumulusnetworks.com \
    --to=dsa@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
    --cc=ddutt@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission$(echo .)com \
    --cc=gospo@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
    --cc=hadi@mojatatu$(echo .)com \
    --cc=hannes@stressinduktion$(echo .)org \
    --cc=jtoppins@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
    --cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind$(echo .)com \
    --cc=nikolay@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
    --cc=roopa@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
    --cc=shm@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
    --cc=sowmini05@gmail$(echo .)com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber$(echo .)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