FS#41135 - [dhcp] dhcp-server reports many bad udp checksums using virtio NIC
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Ruben Kelevra (RubenKelevra) - Tuesday, 08 July 2014, 20:17 GMT
Last edited by Felix Yan (felixonmars) - Thursday, 10 September 2015, 04:12 GMT
Opened by Ruben Kelevra (RubenKelevra) - Tuesday, 08 July 2014, 20:17 GMT
Last edited by Felix Yan (felixonmars) - Thursday, 10 September 2015, 04:12 GMT
|
Details
Description: I'm using KVM/QEMU with virtio interfaces for
the guests, which are added to a bridge on the hostmachine
where the ISC-DHCP-Server is listening on. I started one VM
with virtio NIC and started the ics-dhcp-client on it. The
Client does successfully lease an ip, but the server
constantly reporting broken udp-packages because of the
offloading of virtio.
The virtio NIC does not calculate an checksum but report this nic does support offloading and report a pseudorandom checksum on each package. Fedora does fix this with a patch[1], but seem not committed this to the upstream yet... [1] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/dhcp.git/tree/dhcp-xen-checksum.patch?id=HEAD Debian, Ubuntu etc. use this fix as well, so could we please add this for our package? Other Bugreports: * https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/930962 * http://forge.univention.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33160 Additional info: * package version(s): 4.3.0-1 * Log: dhcpd[11579]: 5 bad udp checksums in 5 packets dhcpd[11579]: 5 bad udp checksums in 5 packets dhcpd[11579]: 5 bad udp checksums in 5 packets dhcpd[11579]: DHCPREQUEST for 192.168.244.2 from 02:de:ad:be:ff:02 via privbr dhcpd[11579]: DHCPACK on 192.168.244.2 to 02:de:ad:be:ff:02 via privbr |
This task depends upon
Closed by Felix Yan (felixonmars)
Thursday, 10 September 2015, 04:12 GMT
Reason for closing: None
Additional comments about closing: Fixed upstream
Thursday, 10 September 2015, 04:12 GMT
Reason for closing: None
Additional comments about closing: Fixed upstream
Comment by Isenmann Daniel (ise) -
Tuesday, 07 July 2015, 07:21 GMT
Comment by Isenmann Daniel (ise) -
Tuesday, 21 July 2015, 19:24 GMT
Comment by
Felix Yan (felixonmars) - Thursday,
10 September 2015, 04:12 GMT
Just for information: At the moment I have too little time for
Arch, I will do my best to find a solution in the next upcoming
weeks.
Is this bug still valid? If so, please give me a short ping
please.
The fix was included upstream since 4.3.1 according to
https://kb.isc.org/article/AA-01297