I'm not sure if this helps eliminate anything but I just tried this in mininet and the same thing occurs there if dl_src/nw_src == dl_dst/nw_dst .
Thanks, Aaron #packet that goes in 14:02:47.309736 06:3b:31:b8:d5:a2 (oui Unknown) > ca:05:25:be:fd:70 (oui Unknown), ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 74: 10.0.0.10.39458 > 10.0.0.11.5004: Flags [S], seq 3794257069, win 5840, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 47077922 ecr 0,nop,wscale 9], length 0 #flow_mod cookie=0, duration_sec=50s, duration_nsec=950000000s, table_id=1, priority=65535, n_packets=1, n_bytes=74, idle_timeout=100,hard_timeout=0,tcp,in_port=2,dl_vlan=0xffff,dl_vlan_pcp=0x00,dl_src=06:3b:31:b8:d5:a2,dl_dst=ca:05:25:be:fd:70,nw_src=10.0.0.10,nw_dst=10.0.0.11,nw_tos=0x00,tp_src=39458,tp_dst=5004,actions=mod_dl_src:06:3b:31:b8:d5:a2,mod_dl_dst:06:3b:31:b8:d5:a2,mod_nw_src:10.0.0.10,mod_nw_dst:10.0.0.10,mod_tp_dst:9877,IN_PORT #packet is not returned. On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Aaron Rosen <aro...@clemson.edu> wrote: > Here are lines (154-158) from here http://codepad.org/APdmOTGN (more debug) > > Thanks, > > Aaron > > Jan 10 14:46:07 localhost ovs-vswitchd: 04385|dpif|DBG|system@dp0: miss > upcall: > Jan 10 14:46:07 localhost ovs-vswitchd: > in_port(0),eth(src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dst=00:1b:21:6a:85:88),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.0.0.10,dst=10.0.0.13,proto=6,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),tcp(src=38710,dst=5004) > Jan 10 14:46:07 localhost ovs-vswitchd: 00:1f:29:32:92:4d > > 00:1b:21:6a:85:88, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 74: 10.0.0.10.38710 > > 10.0.0.13.5004: S 3410511224:3410511224(0) win 14600 <mss > 1460,sackOK,timestamp 9255759 0,nop,wscale 6> > Jan 10 14:46:07 localhost ovs-vswitchd: 04386|dpif|DBG|system@dp0: execute > set(eth(src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dst=00:1f:29:32:92:4d)),set(ipv4(src=10.0.0.10,dst=10.0.0.10,proto=6,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no)),set(tcp(src=38710,dst=9877)),0 > on packet 00:1f:29:32:92:4d > 00:1b:21:6a:85:88, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), > length 74: 10.0.0.10.38710 > 10.0.0.13.5004: S 3410511224:3410511224(0) win > 14600 <mss 1460,sackOK,timestamp 9255759 0,nop,wscale 6> > Jan 10 14:46:07 localhost ovs-vswitchd: 04387|dpif|DBG|system@dp0: > put[create][modify] > in_port(0),eth(src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dst=00:1b:21:6a:85:88),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.0.0.10,dst=10.0.0.13,proto=6,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),tcp(src=38710,dst=5004), > actions:set(eth(src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dst=00:1f:29:32:92:4d)),set(ipv4(src=10.0.0.10,dst=10.0.0.10,proto=6,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no)),set(tcp(src=38710,dst=9877)),0 > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: >> >> I'd expect such packets to show up in tcpdump in any case. >> >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 01:35:48PM -0500, Aaron Rosen wrote: >> > I'd be curious what the expected behavior should be if linux sees a >> > packet >> > arriving on an interface matching it's dl_src/src_ip. (Since this should >> > have probably gone through lo ). >> > >> > I also enabled log_martians and it's not saying anything about this. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Aaron >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Aaron Rosen <aro...@clemson.edu> wrote: >> > >> > > These packets are the normal SYN packets to initial a TCP connection. >> > > >> > > The weird thing though is if I use this flow_mod it works fine: >> > > (using a >> > > fake ip/mac as the response). >> > > >> > > cookie=0x0, duration=6.622s, table=0, n_packets=93776, >> > > n_bytes=6191149, >> > > >> > > idle_timeout=100,priority=65535,tcp,in_port=65534,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dl_dst=00:1b:21:6a:85:88,nw_src=10.0.0.10,nw_dst=10.0.0.13,nw_tos=0,tp_src=53641,tp_dst=5004 >> > > >> > > actions=mod_dl_src:66:f3:43:38:f4:a2,mod_dl_dst:00:1f:29:32:92:4d,mod_nw_src:10.0.0.100,mod_nw_dst:10.0.0.10,mod_tp_dst:9877,IN_PORT >> > > >> > > >> > > Then on return packets for that I have this: (so the client is tricked >> > > in >> > > to connecting to 10.0.0.100 which is really it's self. Though I don't >> > > want >> > > to have to rely on having an extra IP to do this. >> > > >> > > cookie=0x0, duration=6.622s, table=0, n_packets=143378, >> > > n_bytes=158529948, >> > > >> > > idle_timeout=100,tcp,in_port=65534,dl_src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,nw_src=10.0.0.10,nw_dst=10.0.0.100,tp_src=9877,tp_dst=53641 >> > > >> > > actions=mod_dl_src:00:1b:21:6a:85:88,mod_dl_dst:00:1f:29:32:92:4d,mod_nw_dst:10.0.0.10,mod_nw_src:10.0.0.13,mod_tp_src:5004,IN_PORT >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: >> > > >> > >> The datapath actions look like what I'd expect to see. I'd expect >> > >> the >> > >> modified packets to show up in tcpdump. I see that there are only >> > >> two >> > >> such packets over an 18-second period. Can you send them faster? It >> > >> looks like the second packet didn't get caught by the kernel flow >> > >> ("used:never") so both packets were actually processed in userspace; >> > >> perhaps there is a bug in the userspace processing, which is >> > >> currently >> > >> in transition. >> > >> >> > >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 01:12:59PM -0500, Aaron Rosen wrote: >> > >> > pg46 openvswitch # ovs-ofctl dump-flows dp0 >> > >> > NXST_FLOW reply (xid=0x4): >> > >> > # Removed other flows here for paste... >> > >> > cookie=0x0, duration=18.467s, table=0, n_packets=2, n_bytes=148, >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> idle_timeout=100,priority=65535,tcp,in_port=65534,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dl_dst=00:1b:21:6a:85:88,nw_src=10.0.0.10,nw_dst=10.0.0.13,nw_tos=0,tp_src=58209,tp_dst=5004 >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> actions=mod_dl_src:00:1f:29:32:92:4d,mod_dl_dst:00:1f:29:32:92:4d,mod_nw_src:10.0.0.10,mod_nw_dst:10.0.0.10,mod_tp_dst:9877,IN_PORT >> > >> > * >> > >> > * >> > >> > pg46 openvswitch # ovs-dpctl dump-flows dp0 >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> in_port(0),eth(src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dst=00:1b:21:6a:85:88),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.0.0.10,dst=10.0.0.13,proto=6,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),tcp(src=58209,dst=5004), >> > >> > packets:0, bytes:0, used:never, >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> actions:set(eth(src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dst=00:1f:29:32:92:4d)),set(ipv4(src=10.0.0.10,dst=10.0.0.10,proto=6,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no)),set(tcp(src=58209,dst=9877)),0 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > pg46 openvswitch # ovs-appctl -t ovs-vswitchd ofproto/trace dp0 >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> 'in_port(0),eth(src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dst=00:1b:21:6a:85:88),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.0.0.10,dst=10.0.0.13,proto=6,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),tcp(src=58209,dst=5004)' >> > >> > Flow: priority0:tunnel0:in_portfffe:tci(0) >> > >> > mac00:1f:29:32:92:4d->00:1b:21:6a:85:88 type0800 proto6 tos0 ttl64 >> > >> > ip10.0.0.10->10.0.0.13 port58209->5004 >> > >> > Rule: table=0 cookie=0 >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> priority=65535,tcp,in_port=65534,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dl_dst=00:1b:21:6a:85:88,nw_src=10.0.0.10,nw_dst=10.0.0.13,nw_tos=0,tp_src=58209,tp_dst=5004 >> > >> > OpenFlow >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> actions=mod_dl_src:00:1f:29:32:92:4d,mod_dl_dst:00:1f:29:32:92:4d,mod_nw_src:10.0.0.10,mod_nw_dst:10.0.0.10,mod_tp_dst:9877,IN_PORT >> > >> > >> > >> > Final flow: priority0:tunnel0:in_portfffe:tci(0) >> > >> > mac00:1f:29:32:92:4d->00:1f:29:32:92:4d type0800 proto6 tos0 ttl64 >> > >> > ip10.0.0.10->10.0.0.10 port58209->9877 >> > >> > Datapath actions: >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> set(eth(src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dst=00:1f:29:32:92:4d)),set(ipv4(src=10.0.0.10,dst=10.0.0.10,proto=6,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no)),set(tcp(src=58209,dst=9877)),0 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: >> > >> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:15:39PM -0500, Aaron Rosen wrote: >> > >> > >> Hello, >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> I have a quick question about what could be happening to these >> > >> packets. >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> I start a tcp connection 10.0.0.10 > 10.0.0.13: >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> 12:02:55.961344 00:1f:29:32:92:4d (oui Unknown) > >> > >> > >> 00:1b:21:6a:85:88 >> > >> > >> (oui Unknown), ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 74: >> > >> > >> 10.0.0.10.50490 > >> > >> > >> 10.0.0.13.5004: S >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> Then the following flow entry is installed in order to handle >> > >> > >> this >> > >> flow: >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> ?cookie=0x0, duration=4.55s, table=0, n_packets=1, n_bytes=74, >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> idle_timeout=10,priority=65535,tcp,in_port=65534,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:1f:29:32:92:4d,dl_dst=00:1b:21:6a:85:88,nw_src=10.0.0.10,nw_dst=10.0.0.13,nw_tos=0,tp_src=50490,tp_dst=5004 >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> actions=mod_dl_src:00:1f:29:32:92:4d,mod_dl_dst:00:1f:29:32:92:4d,mod_nw_src:10.0.0.10,mod_nw_dst:10.0.0.10,mod_tp_dst:9877,IN_PORT >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> Though, I never see these packets come back in on the interface >> > >> > >> that >> > >> > >> it went out on. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > What does "ovs-appctl ofproto/trace" or "ovs-dpctl dump-flows" >> > >> > > show >> > >> > > happening to the packets? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Aaron O. Rosen >> > >> > Masters Student - Network Communication >> > >> > 306B Fluor Daniel >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Aaron O. Rosen >> > > Masters Student - Network Communication >> > > 306B Fluor Daniel >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Aaron O. Rosen >> > Masters Student - Network Communication >> > 306B Fluor Daniel > > > > > -- > Aaron O. Rosen > Masters Student - Network Communication > 306B Fluor Daniel > > -- Aaron O. Rosen Masters Student - Network Communication 306B Fluor Daniel _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
