Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 27 Feb 2017 18:17:16 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 188990] [xen] dhclient(8) does not accept DHCP Offer on FreeBSD 10 as Xen DomU Guest
Message-ID:  <bug-188990-23905-hZLUJWr2gf@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-188990-23905@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-188990-23905@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D188990

--- Comment #15 from Roger Pau Monn=C3=83=C2=A9 <royger@freebsd.org> ---
(In reply to Bhavesh Davda from comment #14)
And the mbuf(9) man page says:

"If a particular network interface just indicates success or failure of TCP=
 or
UDP checksum validation without returning the exact value of the checksum to
the host CPU, its driver can mark CSUM_DATA_VALID and CSUM_PSEUDO_HDR in
csum_flags, and set csum_data to 0xFFFF hexadecimal to indicate a valid
checksum."

I think that's what maps best to NETRXF_data_validated/CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY=
 (in
fact it's the only combination of outbound flags that make sense for the use
case here AFAICT), but I'm not a network expert.

I think setting CSUM_IP_CHECKED and CSUM_IP_VALID in the netfront driver for
incoming packets is wrong, because netfront is also setting the header to
0xffff, and that's only valid with (CSUM_DATA_VALID |=C2=A0CSUM_PSEUDO_HDR).

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-188990-23905-hZLUJWr2gf>