Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:08:56 +0300
From:      "Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@FreeBSD.org>
To:        "Kris Kennaway" <kris@obsecurity.org>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org, David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: vge(4) bad checksum
Message-ID:  <cb5206420612171308o4c8f2373g26986c5722e606e1@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20061217205249.GA73132@xor.obsecurity.org>
References:  <cb5206420612171246q54ac783h1fd9d420b80ba84c@mail.gmail.com> <20061217205249.GA73132@xor.obsecurity.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/17/06, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 11:46:24PM +0300, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> > I'm not sure what it's all about, but with today's
> > current whatever goes out my vge interface (icmp/
> > tcp/udp) has bad checksum:
>
> This is a FAQ; it's probably using hardware checksum offloading.
>
> Since the packet passed down to the NIC does not yet have the checksum
> computed, it looks to tcpdump like the checksum is incorrect.  However
> if you look at the packet actually transmitted by the NIC
> (e.g. tcpdump on another host), you'll see that it has the correct
> checksum.

I wouldn't even notice the checksum issue if my ipsec
connection to another host hadn't stop working. The
host has ipsec(4) and a re(4) interface. dmesg on the
box showed issues with AH checksums. The problem is
whenever I run tcpdump (promiscuous or not) on re(4),
the box (amd64 current) drops to kernel debugger with
messages like:
panic: mutex Giant not owned at /usr/src/sys/net/bpf.c:1399
But that's another story.

So I guess my fast_ipsec/vge/checksum problem is either
fast_ipsec or fast_ipsec+vge bound. Again, there was no
problem with 20061210-current+ipsec+vge (not fast_ipsec).



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cb5206420612171308o4c8f2373g26986c5722e606e1>