Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 14 Feb 2016 23:01:29 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 207087] kernel: r295285 in 10.2-STABLE breaks OpenVPN functionality
Message-ID:  <bug-207087-2472-L3VmXGlJNq@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-207087-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-207087-2472@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=3D207087

--- Comment #23 from g_amanakis@yahoo.com ---
Created attachment 167004
  --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D167004&action=
=3Dedit
ffoff.pcapng

I did another dump on a client on the local network (directly connected to
gateway, no OpenVPN involved). The gateway ran 10.2-STABLE r295264 GENERIC.=
 The
symptoms when fastforwarding was enabled were the same as with r295285.

I did 2 dumps on the client:=20
net.inet.fastforwarding=3D0 on the gateway =3D=3D=3D> ffoff.pcapng =3D=3D=
=3D> HTTP/GET
happens at packet 10
net.inet.fastforwarding=3D1 on the gateway =3D=3D=3D> ffon.pcapng =3D=3D=3D=
> HTTP/GET happens
at packet 36

The only significant difference I see is that when fastforwarding is turned=
 off
the gateway sends an ICMP Fragmentation needed to the client whereas when
fastforwarding is on this doesn't happen, and the client keeps retransmitti=
ng
the HTTP/GET packet. Could it be that the ip_fastfwd.c doesn't correctly se=
nd
ICMP when the destination is unreachable and fragmentation is required?

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-207087-2472-L3VmXGlJNq>