Herbert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 06:32:07PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >>I'm not sure I understand how this would work, the ICMP message >>looks the same in both cases. Or are you suggesting to >>differentiate based on the source of the ICMP message? > > > Actually you're right, this can't work in the general case. Even > if we had real devices for IPsec tunnels, there is still no way to > reliably figure out which device we should attribute a given MTU > event to if the same address appears on more than one device. > > >>Yes, that would work as a workaround, but it still seems like >>something worth fixing. > > > One possible solution is to not send MTU errors to ourselves since > we it wouldn't give us any new information. We'd need to audit the > users of icmp_send to make sure that there isn't a legitimate case > where we'd want to do that.
One such case is delivery of errors to sockets. We'd need to make sure the errors are delivered some other way. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
