Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 22:51:10 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com> Cc: freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org, Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: IPv6 multicast sent to jail Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1209052249380.98832@ai.fobar.qr> In-Reply-To: <201209051914.q85JEdGR058616@gateway2.orleans.occnc.com> References: <201209051914.q85JEdGR058616@gateway2.orleans.occnc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
>
> In message <alpine.BSF.2.00.1209031219120.76284@ai.fobar.qr>
> "Bjoern A. Zeeb" writes:
>
>> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012, Jamie Gritton wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>>>>> Curtis
>>>>>
>>>>> Offhand, it does sound like a bug. I imagine the solution would be to
>>>>> reject the join - at least the easy solution to be done first until
>>>>> something more complicated can be done to make jails play nice with
>>>>> multicast.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Jamie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jamie,
>>>>
>>>> Certainly not the preferred solution. Best would be a
>>>> jail.allow-ipv6multicast sysctl variable with rejecting the join if 0
>>>> and accepting the join and passing in multicast if 1. Same for v4,
>>>> though not of immediate concern since DHCPv4 doesn't need it.
>>>>
>>>> If you (or someone) would like to point me in the right direction, I
>>>> would be willing to put some time into learning the relevant code and
>>>> proposing a fix. No promises, but I can put some time into it. Off
>>>> list if you prefer.
>>>>
>>>> Curtis
>>>
>>> It'll have to be someone besides me - I don't know enough about
>>> multicast myself to be able to do more than keep it out of jails.
>>
>> sysctl souns bad to me; I think it should actually be grouped by
>> ip4.* and ip6.*. What dod we currently do for raw sockets? Can we
>> have a third level easily, as in ip4.raw.*, ip6.mc.*, ... which of
>> course would kill the classic "allow" thing for raw sockets myabe?
>>
>> /bz
>
> For raw sockets the sysctl variable is:
>
> security.jail.allow_raw_sockets
>
> One sysctl variable for both inet and inet6 AF. Perhaps a reasonable
> name would be:
>
> security.jail.ip4.allow_multicast
> security.jail.ip6.allow_multicast
>
> Just to be clear, I was hoping to get some help if I were to make an
> attempt to allow ipv6 multicast through, though I suspect that the
> code would be very similar for ipv4.
The sysctls are mostly not relevant anymore but yes, if we can get
these options we can look at the code. Defaults to off.
I might be able to help on the v6 trailing end. Jamie could you
prepare the jail options changes for us?
--
Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions!
Stop bit received. Insert coin for new address family.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1209052249380.98832>