net/ipv6: Do not allow device only routes via the multipath API
Subsystems (3)
[email protected]
maintainerPATCH v2 1/1 net/ipv6: Do not allow device only routes via the multipath API
From: David Ahern <[email protected]>
Eric reported that reverting the patch that fixed and simplified IPv6 multipath routes means reverting back to invalid userspace notifications. eg.,
$ ip -6 route add 2001:db8:1::/64 nexthop dev eth0 nexthop dev eth1
only generates a single notification:
2001:db8:1::/64 dev eth0 metric 1024 pref medium
While working on a fix for this problem I found another case that is just broken completely - a multipath route with a gateway followed by device followed by gateway:
$ ip -6 ro add 2001:db8:103::/64
nexthop via 2001:db8:1::64
nexthop dev dummy2
nexthop via 2001:db8:3::64In this case the device only route is dropped completely - no notification to userpsace but no addition to the FIB either:
$ ip -6 ro ls 2001:db8:1::/64 dev dummy1 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:2::/64 dev dummy2 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:3::/64 dev dummy3 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:103::/64 metric 1024 nexthop via 2001:db8:1::64 dev dummy1 weight 1 nexthop via 2001:db8:3::64 dev dummy3 weight 1 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy1 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy2 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy3 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium
Really, IPv6 multipath is just FUBAR'ed beyond repair when it comes to device only routes, so do not allow it all.
This change will break any scripts relying on the mpath api for insert, but I don't see any other way to handle the permutations. Besides, since the routes are added to the FIB as standalone (non-multipath) routes the kernel is not doing what the user requested, so it might as well tell the user that.
---
v2:
- error should be negative as noted by Stefano
net/ipv6/route.c | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
net/ipv6/route.c +7 -0
@@ -4388,6 +4388,13 @@ static int ip6_route_multipath_add(struct fib6_config *cfg, rt =NULL ; goto cleanup; } +if (!rt6_qualify_for_ecmp (rt)) { + err = -EINVAL ; +NL_SET_ERR_MSG (extack, +"Device only routes can not be added for IPv6 using the multipath API." ); +fib6_info_release (rt); + goto cleanup; + } rt->fib6_nh.nh_weight = rtnh->rtnh_hops +1 ;
Signature · 1 line
2.11.0
Quoted 32 lines · On 07/15/2018 09:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
From: David Ahern <[email protected]>
Eric reported that reverting the patch that fixed and simplified IPv6 multipath routes means reverting back to invalid userspace notifications. eg.,
$ ip -6 route add 2001:db8:1::/64 nexthop dev eth0 nexthop dev eth1only generates a single notification:
2001:db8:1::/64 dev eth0 metric 1024 pref mediumWhile working on a fix for this problem I found another case that is just broken completely - a multipath route with a gateway followed by device followed by gateway:
$ ip -6 ro add 2001:db8:103::/64 nexthop via 2001:db8:1::64 nexthop dev dummy2 nexthop via 2001:db8:3::64In this case the device only route is dropped completely - no notification to userpsace but no addition to the FIB either:
$ ip -6 ro ls 2001:db8:1::/64 dev dummy1 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:2::/64 dev dummy2 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:3::/64 dev dummy3 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:103::/64 metric 1024 nexthop via 2001:db8:1::64 dev dummy1 weight 1 nexthop via 2001:db8:3::64 dev dummy3 weight 1 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy1 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy2 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy3 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium
Quoted 8 lines
Really, IPv6 multipath is just FUBAR'ed beyond repair when it comes to device only routes, so do not allow it all.
This change will break any scripts relying on the mpath api for insert, but I don't see any other way to handle the permutations. Besides, since the routes are added to the FIB as standalone (non-multipath) routes the kernel is not doing what the user requested, so it might as well tell the user that.
Yes, I guess we have no real choice for the moment.
Thanks David
Quoted 1 line · Eric Dumazet
Yes, I guess we have no real choice for the moment.
It is unfortunate that we are forever stuck with this mess from a short sighted implementation years ago. From a uapi perspective, dev-only nexthops and proper add-to/append/replace semantics should have been a part of the code from the beginning.
From: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 09:35:19 -0700
Quoted 35 lines
From: David Ahern <[email protected]>
Eric reported that reverting the patch that fixed and simplified IPv6 multipath routes means reverting back to invalid userspace notifications. eg.,
$ ip -6 route add 2001:db8:1::/64 nexthop dev eth0 nexthop dev eth1only generates a single notification:
2001:db8:1::/64 dev eth0 metric 1024 pref mediumWhile working on a fix for this problem I found another case that is just broken completely - a multipath route with a gateway followed by device followed by gateway:
$ ip -6 ro add 2001:db8:103::/64 nexthop via 2001:db8:1::64 nexthop dev dummy2 nexthop via 2001:db8:3::64In this case the device only route is dropped completely - no notification to userpsace but no addition to the FIB either:
$ ip -6 ro ls 2001:db8:1::/64 dev dummy1 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:2::/64 dev dummy2 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:3::/64 dev dummy3 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium 2001:db8:103::/64 metric 1024 nexthop via 2001:db8:1::64 dev dummy1 weight 1 nexthop via 2001:db8:3::64 dev dummy3 weight 1 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy1 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy2 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium fe80::/64 dev dummy3 proto kernel metric 256 pref mediumReally, IPv6 multipath is just FUBAR'ed beyond repair when it comes to device only routes, so do not allow it all.
Quoted 8 lines
This change will break any scripts relying on the mpath api for insert, but I don't see any other way to handle the permutations. Besides, since the routes are added to the FIB as standalone (non-multipath) routes the kernel is not doing what the user requested, so it might as well tell the user that.
Reported-by Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>Signed-off-by David Ahern <[email protected]>
Applied, thanks David.
Is this a -stable candidate?
Quoted 3 lines · David Miller
Is this a -stable candidate?
I think so. The API is not doing what the user requested, even though the route add does not fail.
David Miller
maintainerFrom: David Ahern <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 06:13:43 -0600
Quoted 7 lines · David Miller
Quoted 3 lines
Is this a -stable candidate?
I think so. The API is not doing what the user requested, even though the route add does not fail.
Ok, queued up, thanks.