While testing the default address selection support in linux, i found
some issues in the getaddrinfo() implementation of Rule 3 and Rule 7
in the destination address selection process as described in RFC3484.
Rule 3: Avoid deprecated addresses.
-----------------------------------
This one turned out to be a bug in getaddrinfo() routine while looking
for a matching address in the deprecated/temporary address list.
Instead of searching for the source address, the current code uses the
dest. address. The following patch fixes this issue.
=========================================================================
diff --git a/sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c b/sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c
--- a/sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c
+++ b/sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c
@@ -2085,10 +2085,12 @@ #endif
if (q->ai_family == PF_INET6 && in6ai != NULL)
{
- /* See whether the address is the list of deprecated
- or temporary addresses. */
+ /* See whether the source address is in the list of
+ deprecated or temporary addresses. */
struct in6addrinfo tmp;
- memcpy (tmp.addr, q->ai_addr, IN6ADDRSZ);
+ struct sockaddr_in6 *sin6p =
+ (struct sockaddr_in6 *)&results[i].source_addr;
+ memcpy (tmp.addr, &sin6p->sin6_addr, IN6ADDRSZ);
struct in6addrinfo *found
= bsearch (&tmp, in6ai, in6ailen, sizeof (*in6ai),
============================================================================
Rule 7: Prefer native transport.
--------------------------------
I don't think checking for IFA_F_TEMPORARY flag is the right thing to do
to figure out if we are using a tunnel transport. The temporary flag is
used to support privacy extensions for stateless address autoconfiguration.
Instead, i think we need a way to determine if a source address belongs
to a configured tunnel link sit. Currently, the kernel doesn't provide a
flag to indicate that an address belongs to a tunnel interface. We could
add a new IFA_F_TUNNEL flag, but it requires kernel changes.
The other option is to get the interface type associated with the address.
Is there a convenient way to get device type associated with a particular
address in the getaddrinfo code path?
Which option is preferable?
Thanks
Sridhar
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
