Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

ICMPV6: Wrong Checksum for Packets with Payload Size == 8 #3668

Closed
cgundogan opened this issue Aug 19, 2015 · 4 comments
Closed

ICMPV6: Wrong Checksum for Packets with Payload Size == 8 #3668

cgundogan opened this issue Aug 19, 2015 · 4 comments
Assignees
@miri64
Labels
Area: network Area: Networking Type: bug The issue reports a bug / The PR fixes a bug (including spelling errors)
Milestone
Release 2015.09

Comments

@cgundogan
Copy link
Member

When I have an ICMPV6 packet with an (ipv6) payload of 8, then the icmp code complains about a wrong checksum (gnrc_icmpv6.c).
I can also notice a 2 bytes padding in wireshark at the end of the frame (and marked as VSS-Monitoring ethernet trailer, Source Port: 0)

Rationale: DAO-ACKs are only 8 byte of data if the DODAG-ID is omitted, but they never reach the RPL thread, because the icmpv6 code discards them.
@cgundogan cgundogan added Type: bug The issue reports a bug / The PR fixes a bug (including spelling errors) NSTF labels Aug 19, 2015
@cgundogan cgundogan changed the title ICMPV6: Wrong Checksum for Packets with Payload < 10 ICMPV6: Wrong Checksum for Packets with Payload Size == 8 Aug 19, 2015
@cgundogan
Copy link
Member Author

tested on native and with #3659 by using a global instance id (1 <= id <= 127)

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Aug 19, 2015

That would explain some behavior I had yesterday when testing IPv6 raw sockets (but did not come to analyse it further). Can you maybe investigate this further? I don't know if I have the time for this this week :-/.

@cgundogan cgundogan mentioned this issue Aug 19, 2015
Merged
@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Aug 20, 2015

Does #3669 fix it?

@cgundogan
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, with #3669 the checksums are calculated correctly and the DAO-ACKs get dispatched to the RPL thread

@OlegHahm OlegHahm modified the milestone: Release 2015.09 Sep 2, 2015
@miri64 miri64 added the Area: network Area: Networking label Sep 30, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@miri64 miri64

Labels
Area: network Area: Networking Type: bug The issue reports a bug / The PR fixes a bug (including spelling errors)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Release 2015.09
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@miri64 @cgundogan @OlegHahm