From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178E1C388F7 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 21:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B838E20731 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 21:12:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1604178775; bh=O0zZE71jaQQVKJcpkWVn5+kqfmDOAZoBLv2C4aM1hJo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=vPlqtA6ktOlNOCysLkpc5C14tTPrD5h+Vbz5D1m7DHmomc3JI62WLi/rvPu+acZ9T yXIbt8Dd0YfTTMkv82IvgbKtxa6o9mTHGwB/WN7nw3cZnWN9WXRDOGvIu7dm8sO1Wq MMBhRuJazQHV4Ss9qi7yfrq7MFVENauk2n4kMuH8= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728484AbgJaVMy (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Oct 2020 17:12:54 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:54576 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726254AbgJaVMy (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Oct 2020 17:12:54 -0400 Received: from kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net (c-67-180-217-166.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.217.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B0BBC206E9; Sat, 31 Oct 2020 21:12:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1604178774; bh=O0zZE71jaQQVKJcpkWVn5+kqfmDOAZoBLv2C4aM1hJo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=U8nU3aVRjifpWFtgecdGp4AsQlhzS47rLGv0/3tsJ1i1nEQlHfV5RkTYktL9dGEz6 qcphWPW3w/B2jYu5i+4RcoXGhr0Oz6f/NP7V4QXEcLd0C3aicNN825yN5b3De82cUh AbXzULLm324zUZPwGJ3QymIPJk3CYjfwSesa/Ffs= Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 14:12:52 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Hangbin Liu Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Kuznetsov , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Willem de Bruijn , "David S . Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Georg Kohmann Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 net 0/2] IPv6: reply ICMP error if fragment doesn't contain all headers Message-ID: <20201031141252.25da81fd@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <20201027123313.3717941-1-liuhangbin@gmail.com> References: <20201027022833.3697522-1-liuhangbin@gmail.com> <20201027123313.3717941-1-liuhangbin@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 20:33:11 +0800 Hangbin Liu wrote: > When our Engineer run latest IPv6 Core Conformance test, test v6LC.1.3.6: > First Fragment Doesn=E2=80=99t Contain All Headers[1] failed. The test pu= rpose is to > verify that the node(Linux for example) should properly process IPv6 pack= ets > that don=E2=80=99t include all the headers through the Upper-Layer header. >=20 > Based on RFC 8200, Section 4.5 Fragment Header >=20 > - If the first fragment does not include all headers through an > Upper-Layer header, then that fragment should be discarded and > an ICMP Parameter Problem, Code 3, message should be sent to > the source of the fragment, with the Pointer field set to zero. >=20 > The first patch add a definition for ICMPv6 Parameter Problem, code 3. > The second patch add a check for the 1st fragment packet to make sure > Upper-Layer header exist. Applied, thank you!