Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:30:49 -0400 From: Stephen Clark <sclark46@earthlink.net> To: Guy Helmer <ghelmer@palisadesystems.com> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD eats 169.254.x.x addressed packets Message-ID: <4C0E8C59.5010202@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <A289320A-8306-427B-A834-2D5DCD851F0C@palisadesystems.com> References: <4C0E81D7.8020209@earthlink.net> <A289320A-8306-427B-A834-2D5DCD851F0C@palisadesystems.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 06/08/2010 02:21 PM, Guy Helmer wrote: > On Jun 8, 2010, at 12:45 PM, Stephen Clark wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Why does FreeBSD 6.3 eat 169.254.x.x addressed packet when >> 4.9 didn't? >> >> ***** 6.3 ***** >> $ sudo ipfstat -nio >> empty list for ipfilter(out) >> empty list for ipfilter(in) >> Z2984:~ >> $ ifconfig rl0 >> rl0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 >> options=8<VLAN_MTU> >> inet 192.168.129.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.129.255 >> inet 169.254.1.1 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 169.254.255.255 >> ether 00:30:18:ae:7c:77 >> media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX<full-duplex>) >> status: active >> Z2984:~ >> $ ping 169.254.1.1 >> PING 169.254.1.1 (169.254.1.1): 56 data bytes >> ^C >> --- 169.254.1.1 ping statistics --- >> 4 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss >> Z2984:~ >> $ uname -a >> FreeBSD Z2984.netwolves.com 6.3-RELEASE-p15 FreeBSD 6.3-RELEASE-p15 #17: Fri Apr 16 12:51:57 EST 2010 >> >> **** 4.9 ***** >> FreeBSD H101494.com 4.9-STABLE FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE #59: Thu Mar 30 13:42:10 EST 2006 root@A1234.com:/mnt2/src/sys/compile/ i386 >> H101494# ipf -Fa >> H101494# ipfstat -nio >> empty list for ipfilter(out) >> empty list for ipfilter(in) >> H101494# ifconfig rl0 >> rl0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 >> inet 10.254.151.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.254.151.255 >> inet 10.255.3.30 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 10.255.3.30 >> inet 10.255.4.30 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 10.255.4.30 >> inet 169.254.202.1 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 169.254.255.255 >> ether 00:30:18:a3:49:b5 >> media: Ethernet autoselect (none) >> status: no carrier >> H101494# ping 169.254.202.1 >> PING 169.254.202.1 (169.254.202.1): 56 data bytes >> 64 bytes from 169.254.202.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.052 ms >> 64 bytes from 169.254.202.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.080 ms >> 64 bytes from 169.254.202.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.081 ms >> ^C >> --- 169.254.202.1 ping statistics --- >> 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0% packet loss >> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.052/0.071/0.081/0.013 ms >> >> > > > That was a feature added to sys/netinet/in.c and ip_input.c back in 2007 to obey RFC 3927 not to output datagrams destined for 169.254.0.0/16. > > On a system that needed to be able to send datagrams to 169.254.0.0/16 addresses, I wrote this patch to add a sysctl knob net.inet.fwd_link_local to dynamically allow a system to send those datagrams: > > > Index: in.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/netinet/in.c,v > retrieving revision 1.102.2.4.2.1 > diff -u -r1.102.2.4.2.1 in.c > --- in.c 15 Apr 2009 03:14:26 -0000 1.102.2.4.2.1 > +++ in.c 29 Jul 2009 15:10:42 -0000 > @@ -67,6 +67,9 @@ > struct in_ifaddr *, struct sockaddr_in *, int); > static void in_purgemaddrs(struct ifnet *); > > +int ip_fwdlinklocal = 0; > +SYSCTL_INT(_net_inet_ip, OID_AUTO, fwd_link_local, CTLFLAG_RW, > + &ip_fwdlinklocal, 0, "Forward link-local addresses"); > static int subnetsarelocal = 0; > SYSCTL_INT(_net_inet_ip, OID_AUTO, subnets_are_local, CTLFLAG_RW, > &subnetsarelocal, 0, "Treat all subnets as directly connected"); > @@ -129,7 +132,8 @@ > register u_long i = ntohl(in.s_addr); > register u_long net; > > - if (IN_EXPERIMENTAL(i) || IN_MULTICAST(i) || IN_LINKLOCAL(i)) > + if (IN_EXPERIMENTAL(i) || IN_MULTICAST(i) || > + (!ip_fwdlinklocal&& IN_LINKLOCAL(i))) > return (0); > if (IN_CLASSA(i)) { > net = i& IN_CLASSA_NET; > Index: ip_input.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/netinet/ip_input.c,v > retrieving revision 1.332.2.5.2.1 > diff -u -r1.332.2.5.2.1 ip_input.c > --- ip_input.c 15 Apr 2009 03:14:26 -0000 1.332.2.5.2.1 > +++ ip_input.c 29 Jul 2009 15:10:44 -0000 > @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ > static struct ifqueue ipintrq; > static int ipqmaxlen = IFQ_MAXLEN; > > +extern int ip_fwdlinklocal; > extern struct domain inetdomain; > extern struct protosw inetsw[]; > u_char ip_protox[IPPROTO_MAX]; > @@ -532,7 +533,7 @@ > } > } > /* RFC 3927 2.7: Do not forward datagrams for 169.254.0.0/16. */ > - if (IN_LINKLOCAL(ntohl(ip->ip_dst.s_addr))) { > + if (!ip_fwdlinklocal&& IN_LINKLOCAL(ntohl(ip->ip_dst.s_addr))) { > ipstat.ips_cantforward++; > m_freem(m); > return; > > Hmmm... how is not responding to pings associated with forwarding? -- "They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Ben Franklin) "The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." (Thomas Jefferson)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C0E8C59.5010202>