From patchwork Wed Oct 7 03:55:00 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Hangbin Liu X-Patchwork-Id: 1377769 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork-incoming-netdev@ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming-netdev@ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=vger.kernel.org (client-ip=23.128.96.18; helo=vger.kernel.org; envelope-from=netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=eKoRAIcY; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C5gTy49lGz9sRk for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 14:55:34 +1100 (AEDT) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726730AbgJGDzc (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2020 23:55:32 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46850 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725970AbgJGDzb (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2020 23:55:31 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x544.google.com (mail-pg1-x544.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::544]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB415C061755 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 20:55:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x544.google.com with SMTP id n9so527460pgf.9 for ; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 20:55:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0aHJzV4+ZSQABylhycjqAClix+sMrNfpkuiDZfkonKE=; b=eKoRAIcYG/1rV8sWw7siS6lG8/8FqAAEWgJUa6l8c73SxeIl4MiIWQ+A/aO/ufeQ3c tO6gK6YVYFk+ZJK8GSt+VeqV6ZImzzYHUm7h3z9bbPZPF4rabnRRQB4kh1zycIeP8k2/ 6x17AOTV6CfqHvs6oC4/4iMVQ478we3c+weaGByzxuvuCLpvDPEAQDhlZJyVBZO5xP5I 1p/5QkweUWyPNQ0gc2m9gmarH2EPlZS3IOCdMTzTE5X6h7ofqSFnRlP5EgS6Wtx5c8uz BumJYeIhvoeB4k93YnFZX1cSkyTqAXo8h3ayqWdhpac4EQ2+Xq33xVPv1tsyDEqrAT8G vLWQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0aHJzV4+ZSQABylhycjqAClix+sMrNfpkuiDZfkonKE=; b=AQmJS+hX2QUGxAVfpr/vj3zD590A4d5Tc4Jdfz4xFKiUDqlyHMAI1RPQmM3fvz+R/4 1LfEvEYHJWiCTb/q4dLDLup4FeK8/Px04ub07/upPddTLVmITC2YegmzXAxXBynuVUT8 BDrNVTGGQCp2Tt7ry71B6IawSbR/mfBo1kbXmkxO/f3oq7KE2MEjWQCKFHaK2c5GLULC eYYVQHV3gH4nVeonRnWcKSO5REjMPsYwmSSPFDXeWHQdUBe50APmX1v5FPvs2gVqVCfs P8HK4ukWpUquo8DMZhJWPmI2k+s/boOjEkOeWB0EwWzse6zXeoQ7yHTljXu3f0ki6/nH HbFw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533tdOcBu3MmPbXJTfeR779PG0fHtL3Ed39qTcVshxWsjYUuYbNi bfteos12jGhyE1I0EYTT3aPgt7uRbrY0HQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz4ABnwNcuhRvwU1WZIbr5jHXwE84Q+mgH4BBsQ1gEnWDQPtTsJBvyE/XVuFzYE4xYnhXTaQg== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8d4c:0:b029:150:f692:4129 with SMTP id s12-20020aa78d4c0000b0290150f6924129mr1147824pfe.11.1602042931146; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 20:55:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain.com ([209.132.188.80]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d12sm748246pgd.93.2020.10.06.20.55.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 06 Oct 2020 20:55:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Hangbin Liu To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: "David S . Miller" , Alexey Kuznetsov , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Jakub Kicinski , Willem de Bruijn , Hangbin Liu Subject: [PATCH net 0/2] IPv6: reply ICMP error with fragment doesn't contain all headers Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 11:55:00 +0800 Message-Id: <20201007035502.3928521-1-liuhangbin@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org When our Engineer run latest IPv6 Core Conformance test, test v6LC.1.3.6: First Fragment Doesn’t Contain All Headers[1] failed. The test purpose is to verify that the node(Linux for example) should properly process IPv6 packets that don’t include all the headers through the Upper-Layer header. Based on RFC 8200, Section 4.5 Fragment Header - If the first fragment does not include all headers through an Upper-Layer header, then that fragment should be discarded and an ICMP Parameter Problem, Code 3, message should be sent to the source of the fragment, with the Pointer field set to zero. The first patch add a definition for ICMPv6 Parameter Problem, code 3. The second patch add a check for the 1st fragment packet to make sure Upper-Layer header exist. [1] Page 68, v6LC.1.3.6: First Fragment Doesn’t Contain All Headers part A, B, C and D at https://ipv6ready.org/docs/Core_Conformance_5_0_0.pdf [2] My reproducer: #!/usr/bin/env python3 import sys, os from scapy.all import * # Test v6LC.1.3.6: First Fragment Doesn’t Contain All Headers def send_frag_dst_opt(src_ip6, dst_ip6): ip6 = IPv6(src = src_ip6, dst = dst_ip6, nh = 44) frag_1 = IPv6ExtHdrFragment(nh = 60, m = 1) dst_opt = IPv6ExtHdrDestOpt(nh = 58) frag_2 = IPv6ExtHdrFragment(nh = 58, offset = 4, m = 1) icmp_echo = ICMPv6EchoRequest(seq = 1) pkt_1 = ip6/frag_1/dst_opt pkt_2 = ip6/frag_2/icmp_echo send(pkt_1) send(pkt_2) def send_frag_route_opt(src_ip6, dst_ip6): ip6 = IPv6(src = src_ip6, dst = dst_ip6, nh = 44) frag_1 = IPv6ExtHdrFragment(nh = 43, m = 1) route_opt = IPv6ExtHdrRouting(nh = 58) frag_2 = IPv6ExtHdrFragment(nh = 58, offset = 4, m = 1) icmp_echo = ICMPv6EchoRequest(seq = 2) pkt_1 = ip6/frag_1/route_opt pkt_2 = ip6/frag_2/icmp_echo send(pkt_1) send(pkt_2) if __name__ == '__main__': src = sys.argv[1] dst = sys.argv[2] conf.iface = sys.argv[3] send_frag_dst_opt(src, dst) send_frag_route_opt(src, dst) Hangbin Liu (2): ICMPv6: Add ICMPv6 Parameter Problem, code 3 definition IPv6: reply ICMP error if the first fragment don't include all headers include/uapi/linux/icmpv6.h | 1 + net/ipv6/icmp.c | 13 ++++++++++++- net/ipv6/ip6_input.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++++- 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)