[Jool-list] RFC: Limiting EAM algorithm to specific header fields

[Alberto Leiva]

> The first thing I'd check is what
> happens with rp_filter=1 vs 0 (in /proc/sys/net somewhere). Does that
> make any difference?

Well... nothing so far in my setup :/
I'll test yours tomorrow :)

Thank you

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote:
> Hi Alberto,
>
> * Alberto Leiva
>
>> Tore: How are you testing the Simple approach to hairpinning (ie. as
>> opposed to "Intrinsic")?
>
> A Jool VM "on a stick". So only one network interface with routes for
> both IPv4 and IPv6 pointing out (from Jool's POV), and RFC6052 + IPv4
> EAM pool routed in.
>
>> The IPv4 router bounces the packet but Jool isn't receiving it.
>> The bounced packet can be seen in the IPv4 router's wireshark but not
>> in the SIIT's. Is there some configuration somewhere I might be
>> missing? (I'm going to need to document this :/)
>>
>> I'm a little concerned that, if one of the NICs is the one dropping
>> the packet (maybe it thinks there's a loop?), Simple hairpinning might
>> require a little too much care (or luck?) to be viable?
>
> I will try to test this tomorrow. The first thing I'd check is what
> happens with rp_filter=1 vs 0 (in /proc/sys/net somewhere). Does that
> make any difference?
>
> Tore