----- On Oct 11, 2020, at 7:56 PM, David Ahern dsah...@gmail.com wrote: > On 10/5/20 9:30 AM, David Ahern wrote: >> On 9/25/20 1:04 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Here is an updated series of fixes for ipv4 and ipv6 which which ensure >>> the route lookup is performed on the right routing table in VRF >>> configurations when sending TTL expired icmp errors (useful for >>> traceroute). >>> >>> It includes tests for both ipv4 and ipv6. >>> >>> These fixes address specifically address the code paths involved in >>> sending TTL expired icmp errors. As detailed in the individual commit >>> messages, those fixes do not address similar icmp errors related to >>> network namespaces and unreachable / fragmentation needed messages, >>> which appear to use different code paths. >>> >>> The main changes since the last round are updates to the selftests. >>> >> >> This looks fine to me. I noticed the IPv6 large packet test case is >> failing; the fib6 tracepoint is showing the loopback as the iif which is >> wrong: >> >> ping6 8488 [004] 502.015817: fib6:fib6_table_lookup: table 255 oif 0 >> iif 1 proto 58 ::/0 -> 2001:db8:16:1::1/0 tos 0 scope 0 flags 0 ==> dev >> lo gw :: err -113 >> >> I will dig into it later this week. >> > > I see the problem here -- source address selection is picking ::1. I do > not have a solution to the problem yet, but its resolution is > independent of the change in this set so I think this one is good to go.
OK, do you want to pick up the RFC patch series, or should I re-send it without RFC tag ? Thanks, Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
