Next-hop check not needed?
Vincent Bernat
bernat at luffy.cx
Wed Jun 21 17:11:55 CEST 2017
Hey
in netlink.c, there is this piece of code:
#v+
if (a[RTA_GATEWAY])
{
neighbor *ng;
ra->dest = RTD_ROUTER;
memcpy(&ra->gw, RTA_DATA(a[RTA_GATEWAY]), sizeof(ra->gw));
ipa_ntoh(ra->gw);
#ifdef IPV6
/* Silently skip strange 6to4 routes */
if (ipa_in_net(ra->gw, IPA_NONE, 96))
return;
#endif
ng = neigh_find2(&p->p, &ra->gw, ra->iface,
(i->rtm_flags & RTNH_F_ONLINK) ? NEF_ONLINK : 0);
if (!ng || (ng->scope == SCOPE_HOST))
{
log(L_ERR "KRT: Received route %I/%d with strange next-hop %I",
net->n.prefix, net->n.pxlen, ra->gw);
return;
}
}
#v-
In turns, it calls neigh_find2() which delegates the decision to
if_connected(). if_connected() will return an error if it thinks that
the gateway is not part of the prefix of one of the configured IP
addresses.
This means that if I have the following setup:
ip route add 203.0.113.4/32 dev vnet2
ip route add 203.0.113.15/32 via 203.0.113.4 dev vnet2
BIRD will complain about "strange next-hop" while the setup is perfectly
valid. I don't need an IP address on an interface to route traffic on
it.
I would think the check should just be removed. If the kernel says this
is a valid gateway, it likely is. However, I can't find the reason the
check was added.
In the past, this was just a warning:
#v+
+ ng = neigh_find(&p->p, &ra.gw, 0);
+ if (ng)
+ ra.iface = ng->iface;
+ else
+ /* FIXME: Remove this warning? */
+ log(L_WARN "Kernel told us to use non-neighbor %I for %I/%d", ra.gw, net->n.prefix, net->n.pxlen);
#v-
(commit aa64578641c15b137172acc927d9d7af5914576b)
But this was made an error in commit
9d4d38d1a5d67f5485d2b2fa439c879583dfdcb0.
#v+
- ng = neigh_find(&p->p, &ra.gw, 0);
+ ng = neigh_find2(&p->p, &ra.gw, ifa, 0);
if (ng && ng->scope)
+ {
+ if (ng->iface != ifa)
+ log(L_WARN "KRT: Route with unexpected iface for %I/%d", net->n.prefix, net->n.pxlen);
ra.iface = ng->iface;
+ }
else
- /* FIXME: Remove this warning? Handle it somehow... */
+ {
log(L_WARN "Kernel told us to use non-neighbor %I for %I/%d", ra.gw, net->n.prefix, net->n.pxlen);
+ return;
+ }
#v-
Commit message says "Fixes some problems related to link-local routes in
KRT interface". Does this ring any bell?
--
Avoid temporary variables.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
More information about the Bird-users
mailing list