On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi Xin
>
> I have used 3.10.0-514.6.2.el7.x86_64 on Centos7 and tessted. the
> same issue still occur.
>
> any idea?
>
what I can only see is :
03:32:37.928679 IP 10.165.250.22.3868 > 192.168.2.13.40001: sctp (1) [HB REQ]
03:32:37.928717 IP 192.1
Hi Xin
I have used 3.10.0-514.6.2.el7.x86_64 on Centos7 and tessted. the
same issue still occur.
any idea?
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Xin Long wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Sun Paul wrote:
>> Hi, can I confirm that the problem is on the Linux router itself or on
>> both ser
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi, can I confirm that the problem is on the Linux router itself or on
> both server and client?
>
try with a new kernel in router, like build and install a upstream
kernel on your route machine.
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dave
Hi, can I confirm that the problem is on the Linux router itself or on
both server and client?
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Xin Long wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Sun Paul wrote:
>> does this fixed in RHEL7?
> yes, I think so.
>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Xin Long w
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Sun Paul wrote:
> does this fixed in RHEL7?
yes, I think so.
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Xin Long wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Sun Paul wrote:
>>> Hi Xin
>>>
>>> do you mean we need to patch the kernel?
>> Yups, pls comment on that bz if
does this fixed in RHEL7?
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Xin Long wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Sun Paul wrote:
>> Hi Xin
>>
>> do you mean we need to patch the kernel?
> Yups, pls comment on that bz if it's really needed for your env.
> A z-stream kernel may be available for tha
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi Xin
>
> do you mean we need to patch the kernel?
Yups, pls comment on that bz if it's really needed for your env.
A z-stream kernel may be available for that issue soon.
Thanks.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Xin Long wrote:
>> O
Hi Xin
do you mean we need to patch the kernel?
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Xin Long wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Sun Paul wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> the router is actually is a linux running on RHEL6.8
>> (2.6.32-642.4.2.el6.x86_64). it uses iptables to do SNAT aand DNAT
>> forwar
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi
>
> the router is actually is a linux running on RHEL6.8
> (2.6.32-642.4.2.el6.x86_64). it uses iptables to do SNAT aand DNAT
> forward.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1412038
sctp_manip_pkt->sctp_compute_cksum:
struct sctphdr
Hi
the router is actually is a linux running on RHEL6.8
(2.6.32-642.4.2.el6.x86_64). it uses iptables to do SNAT aand DNAT
forward.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:53 PM, Xin Long wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Sun Paul wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> sorry to get back late, the platform is running
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sorry to get back late, the platform is running on KVM. and this
> problem is resolved by moving to VMware environment, however, a new
> problem is coming out, we noticed that the HB REQ is being ABORT from
> client.
>
>
> 03:32:35.23357
Hi,
sorry to get back late, the platform is running on KVM. and this
problem is resolved by moving to VMware environment, however, a new
problem is coming out, we noticed that the HB REQ is being ABORT from
client.
03:32:35.233572 IP 10.165.250.22.3868 > 192.168.2.13.40001: sctp (1)
[HB REQ] (f
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:43:39AM +0100, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> Your router does NOT change any field in the SCTP packet, but the
> SCTP checksum was modified from
>Checksum: 0xbaea49e5 (not verified)
> to
>Checksum: 0xa9a86d3f (not verified)
Sun, which operating system is your router r
> On 13 Jan 2017, at 10:43, Michael Tuexen
> wrote:
>
> Your router does NOT change any field in the SCTP packet, but the
> SCTP checksum was modified from
> Checksum: 0xbaea49e5 (not verified)
> to
> Checksum: 0xa9a86d3f (not verified)
> At least one of these is wrong. Read the tracefiles
Your router does NOT change any field in the SCTP packet, but the
SCTP checksum was modified from
Checksum: 0xbaea49e5 (not verified)
to
Checksum: 0xa9a86d3f (not verified)
At least one of these is wrong. Read the tracefiles in wireshark and
enable checksum validation and wireshark will tell
Packet to SERVER (From router to SERVER) [ Source IP: 192.168.206.83,
Destination IP: 192.168.206.66. the IPv4 address parameter is
192.168.206.83 and 192.168.1.83 ]
No. Time SourceSPort
Destination Protocol DPort Length In
Packet to SERVER (from router to SERVER)[ Source IP: 192.168.206.83,
Destination IP: 192.168.206.66. the IPv4 address parameter is
192.168.206.83 and 192.168.1.83 ]
No. Time SourceSPort
Destination Protocol DPort Length Info
Hi All
below is the packet trace in text format.
Packet received (From client to router) [ Source IP: 192.168.206.83,
Destination IP: 192.168.206.65. the IPv4 address parameter is
192.168.206.83 and 192.168.1.83 ]
==
No. Time Source
> On 12 Jan 2017, at 10:51, David Laight wrote:
>
> From: Sun Paul [mailto:paul...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 12 January 2017 09:31
>> Let me clear the understanding. below is the flow.
>>
>> 1. Client sends to Linux Router: 192.168.206.83 -> 192.168.206.56,
>> 2. Linux router sends to SERVER where the
From: Sun Paul [mailto:paul...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 12 January 2017 09:31
> Let me clear the understanding. below is the flow.
>
> 1. Client sends to Linux Router: 192.168.206.83 -> 192.168.206.56,
> 2. Linux router sends to SERVER where the source IP is unchanged:
> 192.168.206.83 -> 192.168.206.66
HI
Let me clear the understanding. below is the flow.
1. Client sends to Linux Router: 192.168.206.83 -> 192.168.206.56,
2. Linux router sends to SERVER where the source IP is unchanged:
192.168.206.83 -> 192.168.206.66
My question here is why SERVER cannot response this INIT chunk?
On Wed, Jan
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 04:39:29PM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
> yes. whenever the INIT packet send to 192.168.206.65, it will forward
> to 192.168.206.66. My question is when this packet arrive to
> 192.168.206.66, why LKSCTP never pass to user level.
>
Yessoo, unlike what you said before, there
yes. whenever the INIT packet send to 192.168.206.65, it will forward
to 192.168.206.66. My question is when this packet arrive to
192.168.206.66, why LKSCTP never pass to user level.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 09:30:39AM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 09:30:39AM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
> Packet received (From client)
> ==
>
> No. Time SourceSPort
> Destination Protocol DPort Length Info
> DSCP
> 1 2017-0
Packet to SERVER
No. Time SourceSPort
Destination Protocol DPort Length Info
DSCP
2 2017-01-06 08:52:49.662321192.168.206.8350001
192.168.206.66SCTP 3868
Packet received (From client)
==
No. Time SourceSPort
Destination Protocol DPort Length Info
DSCP
1 2017-01-06 08:52:49.662142192.168.206.8350001
192.168.206.65
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:31:01AM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
> what kind of information do you need? the whole INIT packet?
>
That would be ideal.
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 06:00:36PM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> the linux router ju
what kind of information do you need? the whole INIT packet?
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 06:00:36PM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> the linux router just change the destination, so it can arrive on the
>> the SERVER.
>>
> Please post the relevan
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 06:00:36PM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi
>
> the linux router just change the destination, so it can arrive on the
> the SERVER.
>
Please post the relevant snippets from the client and server tcpdump
operations
Neil
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 5:51 PM, David Laight wrote:
>
Hi
the linux router just change the destination, so it can arrive on the
the SERVER.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 5:51 PM, David Laight wrote:
> From: Sun Paul
>> Sent: 09 January 2017 02:08
>
>> >> I am setting up a lab where the SCTP traffics from client is passing
>> >> through a linux router befo
From: Sun Paul
> Sent: 09 January 2017 02:08
> >> I am setting up a lab where the SCTP traffics from client is passing
> >> through a linux router before reaching to the SCTP server running
> >> LKSCTP.
> >>
> >> The linux router did not change the source address of the client, so
> >> when it ar
OK. I actually verified the connectivity using SSH to port 22. it
works. so I do not have any idea why it has problem on SCTP.
need more help on this. is there anyway to enable debug? the version
that I am using is lksctp-tools-1.0.10-7
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi
>
Hi
the INIT chunk arrive on the SERVER, but then no response. the
application that using in SERVER is the same as the other test.
I noticed one thing in Ethernet frame of the incoming packet on the
SERVER compared to the one captured from the client is the LG bit on
the source address.
The LG bi
Hi
I actually have set the rp_filter to 2 already but still the same.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 05:34:47PM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I am setting up a lab where the SCTP traffics from client is passing
>> through
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 05:34:47PM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am setting up a lab where the SCTP traffics from client is passing
> through a linux router before reaching to the SCTP server running
> LKSCTP.
>
> The linux router did not change the source address of the client, so
> when it
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 05:34:47PM +0800, Sun Paul wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am setting up a lab where the SCTP traffics from client is passing
> through a linux router before reaching to the SCTP server running
> LKSCTP.
>
> The linux router did not change the source address of the client, so
> wh
36 matches
Mail list logo
