Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 13:54:33 +0100 From: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> To: Emeric POUPON <emeric.poupon@stormshield.eu>, freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Fragment questions Message-ID: <550AC709.1050404@selasky.org> In-Reply-To: <522774578.25519037.1426765109046.JavaMail.zimbra@stormshield.eu> References: <522774578.25519037.1426765109046.JavaMail.zimbra@stormshield.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 03/19/15 12:38, Emeric POUPON wrote: > Hello, > > I noticed two questionable things in the fragmentation code: > - in ip_fragment, we do not copy the flowid from the original mbuf to the fragmented mbuf. Therefore we may output very desynchronized fragments (first fragment emitted far later the second fragment, etc.) > - in the ip_newid macro, we do "htons(V_ip_id++))" if we do not use randomized id. In multi core systems, we may emit successive packets with the same id. > > Both problems combined lead to bad packet reassembly on the remote host. > > What do you think? > Hi, I think this issue is already fixed: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/netinet/ip_output.c?revision=278103&view=markup --HPS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?550AC709.1050404>