Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 09 Jun 2016 09:08:33 -0400
From:      "Kristof Provost" <kp@FreeBSD.org>
To:        "Slawa Olhovchenkov" <slw@zxy.spb.ru>
Cc:        stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ipfw fwd to closed port
Message-ID:  <F1894D5E-0951-4E6B-8BCF-CB25CD25A9A8@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160609130601.GS75630@zxy.spb.ru>
References:  <20160608230240.GA51364@zxy.spb.ru> <20160609130017.GA4071@vega.codepro.be> <20160609130601.GS75630@zxy.spb.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On 9 Jun 2016, at 9:06, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 03:00:17PM +0200, Kristof Provost wrote:
>
>> On 2016-06-09 02:02:40 (+0300), Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> wrote:
>>> Forwarding by ipfw to closed local port generating RST packet with
>>> incorrect checksun. Is this know ussuse? Need open PR?
>>
>> Where did you capture the packet? If you've captured the packet on the
>> machine that generated it tcpdump may indeed claim that the checksum is
>> wrong, because it's computed by the hardware (so after tcpdump captured
>> it).
>
> On the tun0 (destination of RST packet routed to tun0).
> tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
>         options=80000<LINKSTATE>
>         inet 192.168.4.1 --> 192.168.4.1 netmask 0xffffff00
>         inet6 fe80::240:63ff:fedc:ac9e%tun0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x9
>         nd6 options=21<PERFORMNUD,AUTO\_LINKLOCAL>
>         Opened by PID 1345
>
> tun0 don't computed checksum.

I’m not sure I understand what you’re trying to say.

In any case: either capture the packet outside the machine, or confirm
that the checksum is wrong by watching the relevant netstat counters.

Regards,
Kristof



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F1894D5E-0951-4E6B-8BCF-CB25CD25A9A8>