From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Tue Mar 20 22:08:17 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9E0DF4F055 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 22:08:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ascherrer@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wm0-x22d.google.com (mail-wm0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 368F76ADA9 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 22:08:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ascherrer@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wm0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id h76so6320546wme.4 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 15:08:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1DtpjNJRis2lobKtCFuDtWGti4HPKQoDrfyoJjZVhMc=; b=msFzv4RpVe6sNxxukYPjxAd7QiApnPArRde/6tFqvKpniAiXfj/jtwsa5gwG/WwuCO +9qQ4Nnye2VXYqbH13NuRQYQO75XZmdRvOSgjmGdrwvk7DEJaACJVJeItdiSnkpS5irU 83zshg2cvzQe49GN/dmuuQidlLxD/opGEPJtyF4r8Tbbk84pps/xe0eIn38DYKK+LUPc UFV2SvNXRPu83SlUxZx36DkH6yz7cY+Zu+hCkRyMRiF0h9SMC1021cIPQR2f4xmtX7us d127T76sBRgY1suMms7aBzaaCZv54MJEmCDUKhVUYAiDK0xfoR6ajkzPqlj1A+jp5xAV PBAQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1DtpjNJRis2lobKtCFuDtWGti4HPKQoDrfyoJjZVhMc=; b=avxNTOxGa95XKORP1pOGk6m7g3V8ZKWuU8QheipzAVXpbnUwnKrtFniXwTsUzljlum FbFSG++wY2W3UEOnvcggUTPr6owhw8BwaZheWHWbSK2xx+oH9Ov7HFj8jVHChDXDNQCv ct2E4hxpkxo59c73EYxEszTt7TQ4yFL0V2d1ReQa2eKz3T4rr3/bOc/twY37rWFXEU4H l2GttywJGpgR3fr2W4olk0BXvKBKThtSk7dznElV2uPO0Q/62Wzjg8QMsTHBz/YDIR08 ILqYLWMpsweHU8w3+yldaNELAGwOJKgvlq0O3CTcRSewYtjCX3yM2/hqFECkIMMrOcQf 6akw== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7FVBF40MzTHdMhznmuvAupvQrZyMgiqYlh07M+daRgsGDtkEIbL 1meUpAGist2Aeg87yTvL84uskqx6 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELuf7nTo2jn8P825HThA4qxHKTXPxU+i1jrdp66UQr8lSOoGgthum8vIBoQ2kuSwXUcQqWI8jw== X-Received: by 10.80.224.205 with SMTP id j13mr19471184edl.304.1521583695559; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 15:08:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from juntos.woohoo.ch ([2a02:168:681c:460:dcd1:14c1:6604:1e9b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o52sm2596268edc.93.2018.03.20.15.08.14 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 20 Mar 2018 15:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Multicast/SSDP not working (on VLAN interface) To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <201803192311.w2JNB5lU014039@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> From: Andreas Scherrer Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 23:08:14 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201803192311.w2JNB5lU014039@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 22:08:18 -0000 Hi Thank you, Rodney and Ivan, for coming back to me (and so quickly). On 20.03.18 00:11, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: ... >> So I suspect that "something" is dropping the M-SEARCH packets for some >> reason after they are received. And I cannot get rid of the feeling that >> it has something to do with the fact that the incoming interface is a >> VLAN interface... >> My first guess, anti spoofing, seems not to be the problem (I am using >> ipfw and "not antispoof in" but that does not seem to drop any traffic). > > Are you running with "firewall_type="simple""? > If so it is set to block all 224/4 packets, see this part > of /etc/rc.firewall: ... No, my firewall is made from "hand curated" ipfw rules. And I am pretty sure (never 100%, but 99% this time), that this is not a firewall issue. Why? I have the following rule that should accept traffic from my client(s) to 239.255.255.250:1900 in place: allow ip from any to not me in recv re1\* And, when I place a rule like this just before and after that rule: count log ip from any to any via re1\* I see hits before but not after the "allow" rule. Hence, the policy accepts the packet(s). No? Also, just adding the route for 224.0.0.0/4, without touching the ipfw rules, makes things work... And I am *not* using "verrevpath" in my ifpw rules (I do use "antispoof", but as the packets hit the rule(s) mentioned above, that does not seem to be the problem). I might give Ivan's code a try, but I am not very good at compiling and installing software :( If anybody is able to provide an additional hint in the mean time, I am more than happy to follow up. Best andreas