Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 16:10:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Brad Laue <brad@brad-x.com> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/28974: PPPoE software fails when SOCK_RAW employed Message-ID: <200107152310.f6FNA6j66118@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/28974; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Brad Laue <brad@brad-x.com> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> Cc: <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG>, <roman@xpert.com> Subject: Re: kern/28974: PPPoE software fails when SOCK_RAW employed Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:00:29 -0400 (EDT) Hmm.. If the difference is indeed the version of FreeBSD used, that definitely does point to an issue with the system, and not with nmap itself. The curiosity is this; nmap 'hostname of PPPoE IP' will stall out and say host is down, but nmap -P0 'PPPoE IP' works. Oddly, simply nmap 'PPPoE IP' stalls out as well. I don't know what to make of it, all I know is that with each subsequent CVS, I am having more and more network problems on a system I can't afford to have degenerate. :( Brad On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Brian Somers wrote: > Hi, > > I've installed nmap here and it seems to work ok. I have the > following relevant interfaces: > > wi0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 > inet 217.204.245.19 netmask 0xfffffff0 broadcast 217.204.245.31 > [.....] > tun1: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1490 > inet 172.16.0.12 --> 172.16.0.1 netmask 0xffff0000 > > and the following relevant routes: > > Internet: > Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire > default 217.204.245.17 UGSc 5 59 wi0 > [.....] > 172.16/24 172.16.0.1 UGSc 4 0 tun1 > 172.16.0.1 172.16.0.12 UH 8 3307 tun1 > > tun1 is a PPPoE tunnel into my LAN (the wireless gateway is outside > my firewall). It uses the wi0 interface as a transport. > > I can run nmap on 172.16.0.1 and any of the 172.16.0.* machines in > side my LAN, as well as being able to run it on outside machines > (which aren't going through the tunnel). > > I'm running -current though - maybe that's the important difference ? > > > Hping is an example of the tool I used to further troubleshoot the > > problem, not the problem itself; PPPoE is definitely broken, and has been > > reported as such on several occasions, but in the wrong place. > > > > The problem is that what I used as a diagnostic is itself flawed to the > > point of not working with PPPoE based connections. > > > > I would still like to further understand why programs such as nmap > > are having such a difficult time working with a networking > > implementation that should by all rights be transparent. > > > > My only surmise to date is that since NetGraph is dealing with Raw > > Sockets to encapsulate PPPoE, it is interfering with userspace programs' > > ability to do same. > > > > I am however glad to have been able to point out the problematic port, > > being overproductive is a good thing. :) > > > > Here is an example of the problem as related by another person. I've had > > this identical issue, and have not yet corrected it: > > > > http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&ic=1&th=7866b9324b3e2b97,2&seekm=002e01c0b710%24d3306da0%242ac67fd8_blah2%40ns.sol.net#p > > > > The surmise is misconfigured libcap, but this is nullified by the user's > > claim that nmap functions over interfaces not covered by PPPoE, also my > > experience. > > > > Please continue to consider this a PPPoE issue, but let me know if you'd > > like me to submit a PR regarding hping itself. > > > > Thanks, > > Brad > [.....] > > -- > Brian <brian@freebsd-services.com> <brian@Awfulhak.org> > http://www.freebsd-services.com/ <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org> > Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! <brian@[uk.]OpenBSD.org> > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200107152310.f6FNA6j66118>