Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*icmp_unreachable\s+uses\s+wrong\s+ip\s*$/: 34 ]

Total 34 documents matching your query.

1. icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: "J. Simonetti" <jeroens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 15:21:19 +0200
I've recently come to notice that traceroutes through a linux router use the wrong ip (ip of exitting interface) wich should actually be the ip of the incomming interface. I've found a trivial patch
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00018.html (8,535 bytes)

2. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 16:59:05 +0300
There is nothing _wrong_ with this behaviour. Linux just behaves this way. Similar patches have been posted to the list repeatedly AFAIK with no any response from developers. Can someone enlighten us
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00019.html (9,882 bytes)

3. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 16:52:06 +0200
Why can't you simply add the prefered source address to the route? Regards Patrick
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00021.html (9,151 bytes)

4. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 20:38:21 +0300
Because I don't know what it is. Router A knows what's the best path from router A to router B, but he can't know (at least in cases where there are more than 1 path between them) what's the best pat
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00025.html (9,823 bytes)

5. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 00:04:48 +0200
Your patch can't guarantee that the address used is the same that was used as nexthop by the previous hop in the path when multiple addresses are configured on the incoming interface. So I don't thin
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00034.html (10,115 bytes)

6. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 09:44:48 +0300
At first I don't care what was used as nexthop. I want to know which physical link was used. Having multiple addresses in the same link is more corner case in core network anyway. And can you explain
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00047.html (10,665 bytes)

7. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 11:22:44 +0200
For what it's worth, I would love to see something like this in. In the presence of asymmetric routing, the way linux routers show up on traceroutes has always been slightly confusing to me. (I know,
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00049.html (9,711 bytes)

8. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 12:42:01 +0300 (EEST)
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: (I know, "Every other router vendor out there does it this way." is not a good reason for doing it the same way.) There's no specification requiring or re
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00050.html (9,689 bytes)

9. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 12:38:06 +0200
Sorry, I wasn't claiming that every other router vendor out there does it that way, just merely trying to state that that would not be a good argument. The ones I've worked with in the past do, and I
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00057.html (10,351 bytes)

10. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 14:00:47 +0300
I haven't seen JUNOS or IOS versions behave differently. I can add to it (probably all) Extreme Networks line. Tested with both software lines - Summit 24e3 and Inferno (Black Diamond 6808). -- Hasso
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00059.html (10,000 bytes)

11. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 14:46:44 +0300
Chris Wilson was probably author of this patch. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-net&m=109595048606145&w=2 -- Hasso Tepper Elion Enterprises Ltd. WAN administrator
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00062.html (9,559 bytes)

12. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 20:15:02 +0200
But when multiple addresses are used the result can be even more confusing. I don't like inconsistent behaviour, and this patch works sometimes and sometimes it doesn't. I can think of none. Regards
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00069.html (10,380 bytes)

13. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 02:35:33 +0300
I see no behaviour you can define as "it doesn't work". Purpose of this patch is to provide info about links (not addresses, you can't have this info) used to forward packets and it does the job. Exa
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00116.html (10,061 bytes)

14. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 01:37:40 +0200
Well, arguably it can be called "doesn't work" if addresses not used at all during transmit of the packet show up in traceroute. Regards Patrick
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00117.html (10,075 bytes)

15. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Glen Turner <glen.turner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 10:45:45 +0930
Pekka Savola wrote: There's no specification requiring or recommending either of these approaches, either for v6 or v4 AFAICS so you can't depend on that behaviour.. In the lack of a specification, d
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00128.html (10,232 bytes)

16. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Meelis Roos <mroos@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 10:03:45 +0300
Nevertheless this patch seems to be the most logical thing to do and is _much_ better than current state IMHO. Principle of least surprise. -- Meelis Roos
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00140.html (8,977 bytes)

17. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 10:29:51 +0200
That argument doesn't hold, since exactly the same situation occurs if we use the outgoing address as we do now. With asymmetric routing, the incoming interface, interface to the destination, and the
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00142.html (10,959 bytes)

18. icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: "J. Simonetti" <jeroens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 15:21:19 +0200
I've recently come to notice that traceroutes through a linux router use the wrong ip (ip of exitting interface) wich should actually be the ip of the incomming interface. I've found a trivial patch
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01307.html (8,550 bytes)

19. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 16:59:05 +0300
There is nothing _wrong_ with this behaviour. Linux just behaves this way. Similar patches have been posted to the list repeatedly AFAIK with no any response from developers. Can someone enlighten us
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01308.html (9,946 bytes)

20. Re: icmp_unreachable uses wrong ip (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 16:52:06 +0200
Why can't you simply add the prefered source address to the route? Regards Patrick
/archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01310.html (9,247 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu