From nobody@FreeBSD.org Thu Nov 1 00:03:35 2001 Return-Path: Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EA6737B403 for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 00:03:34 -0800 (PST) Received: (from nobody@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.4/8.11.4) id fA183YT98660; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 00:03:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nobody) Message-Id: <200111010803.fA183YT98660@freefall.freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 00:03:34 -0800 (PST) From: Jens Kassel To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Problem with the timestamp option when flag equals zero X-Send-Pr-Version: www-1.0 >Number: 31686 >Category: kern >Synopsis: Problem with the timestamp option when flag equals zero >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Responsible: andre >State: suspended >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: sw-bug >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Thu Nov 01 00:10:01 PST 2001 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: Wed Sep 06 17:26:28 GMT 2006 >Originator: Jens Kassel >Release: FreeBSD 4.3 >Organization: Enea Realtime AB >Environment: FreeBSD labb4.enea.se 4.3-RELEASE FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE #0: Wed Oct 3 16:18:02 CEST 2001 root@labb4.enea.se:/usr/src/sys/compile/JENSKERNEL i386 >Description: When sending a Packet (ping) with the ip option timestamp and flag = 0. Type = 68, Length = 8, Pointer = 5, oflw = 0, flag = 0, timestamp = 32 bits of zeros. The respons is a echo reply (correct) but with the overflow flag set to 1 (incorrect) and no timestamp supplied. Using flag = 1 or 3 gives the correct response. >How-To-Repeat: Create a IP packet with timestamp option (see above) + Icmp echo request and send it to the FreeBSD host/router. Check the timestamp option in the reply. The overflow flag is set but it should not. >Fix: I guess timestamp with only timestamp is not implemented. It seems like timestamp with timestamp + IP address is only implemented. >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->bms Responsible-Changed-By: bms Responsible-Changed-When: Tue 25 Nov 2003 09:11:45 PST Responsible-Changed-Why: I'm in hoover up network PRs mode. I'll look into this. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=31686 State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: bms State-Changed-When: Wed Jun 16 02:12:55 GMT 2004 State-Changed-Why: It looks like we don't fully support RFC 781. There is probably little interest in doing so, as it's optional. The appropriate place to add code would be around the IPOPT_RR/IPOPT_TS check in icmp_reflect(). http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=31686 State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->suspended State-Changed-By: bms State-Changed-When: Wed Jun 16 02:14:47 GMT 2004 State-Changed-Why: If someone has patches for this, well and good, but I have a feeling committer time is better spent elsewhere... http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=31686 Responsible-Changed-From-To: bms->freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: bms Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Aug 2 13:28:14 UTC 2006 Responsible-Changed-Why: Back to the free pool. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=31686 Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->andre Responsible-Changed-By: andre Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Sep 6 17:25:48 UTC 2006 Responsible-Changed-Why: Take this PR into safekeeping. I was the last one touching IP options stuff. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=31686 >Unformatted: