Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:40:11 GMT From: John Court <john.w.court@nokia.com> To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: kern/117234: ipfw send_pkt() and ipfw_tick() don't seem to support IPV6 Message-ID: <200710160740.l9G7eB9O020108@www.freebsd.org> Resent-Message-ID: <200710160750.l9G7o1NZ065548@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Number: 117234 >Category: kern >Synopsis: ipfw send_pkt() and ipfw_tick() don't seem to support IPV6 >Confidential: no >Severity: serious >Priority: low >Responsible: freebsd-bugs >State: open >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: sw-bug >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Tue Oct 16 07:50:01 UTC 2007 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: >Originator: John Court >Release: 6.1 >Organization: Nokia >Environment: Hmm sorry but this was found from a review of the code and observance of an issue when porting it to another FreeBSD based platform. >Description: I can't see how the send_pkt() routine in ip_fw2.c would create a valid ipv6 source and destination address. This is relevent due to its use in ipfw_tick(). Basically in an ipv6 configuration when ipfw_tick() goes off to send a keep-alive, I think send_pkt() would produce an erroneous IPV4 style packet due to its use of id->dst_ip and id->src_ip rather than dst_ip6 and src_ip6 ? Further, ipfw_tick() then calls ip_output() rather than any ip6_output() routine. Cheers John >How-To-Repeat: >Fix: >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted:
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200710160740.l9G7eB9O020108>