On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 03:52:50PM +0530, Vipul Singhania wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:33:50AM +0530, Vipul Singhania wrote: > >> Thanks for reply. > >> > >> There is no firewall in that network. This is just separate network. > >> and I can say they are directly connected to each other using L1 > >> switch and no other connection to outside world. > >> > >> It was jut testing that I have giving public IP to one of interface in one host. > >> > >> - The association look like with public IP. > >> > >> sh-3.2# cat /proc/net/sctp/assocs > >> ASSOC SOCK STY SST ST HBKT ASSOC-ID TX_QUEUE RX_QUEUE UID INODE > >> LPORT RPORT LADDRS <-> RADDRS HBINT INS OUTS MAXRT T1X T2X RTXC > >> ffff8800089b0000 ffff8800335944c0 2 1 3 37916 3 516 > >> 0 0 10635 48520 7168 127.3.253.1 127.3.21.1 127.4.253.1 > >> 127.2.253.1 127.1.221.1 164.48.1.1 127.3.254.1 <-> *127.4.252.1 > >> 7500 300 300 10 0 0 0 > >> ffff8800089b2000 ffff880033594000 2 1 3 50717 4 516 > >> 0 0 10634 60890 7169 127.3.253.1 127.3.21.1 127.4.253.1 > >> 127.2.253.1 127.1.221.1 164.48.1.1 127.3.254.1 <-> *127.4.252.1 > >> 7500 300 300 10 0 0 0 > >> > >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - But if I give private IP (10.1.1.1) this look like. > >> > >> sh-3.2# cat /proc/net/sctp/assocs > >> ASSOC SOCK STY SST ST HBKT ASSOC-ID TX_QUEUE RX_QUEUE UID INODE > >> LPORT RPORT LADDRS <-> RADDRS HBINT INS OUTS MAXRT T1X T2X RTXC > >> ffff88003c721800 ffff8800335944c0 2 1 3 22045 2 0 > >> 0 0 5674 47434 7169 127.3.253.1 127.3.21.1 127.4.253.1 > >> 127.2.253.1 127.1.221.1 <-> *127.4.252.1 7500 300 300 10 > >> 0 0 0 > >> ffff88003c720800 ffff880033594000 2 1 3 36124 1 0 > >> 0 0 5673 58513 7168 127.3.253.1 127.3.21.1 127.4.253.1 > >> 127.2.253.1 127.1.221.1 <-> *127.4.252.1 7500 300 300 10 > >> 0 0 0 > >> > > I don't see any difference between the two environments here. How exactly are > > you 'giving' a private ip here? Are you attempting an ADDIP operation? > > > > [Vipul] -- The difference which I can is the public IP 164.48.1.1 is > there in association list. (Why & how this case in this list this I am > not able to understand). however If I assign the IP 10.1.1.1/24 to my > eth0 it doesn't come in this association. > The IP address assignment is using ifconfig. > Ok, so all your doing is specifying it on the interface, you're not explicitly binding to it in whatever program you have. > >> > >> - I may be wrong but is it possible that when we do bind with on IP > >> (and if multi homing is enabled) it'll build with all available > >> interfaces? > >> > > The opposite in fact. If you bind to a local address the association on that > > socket will be creating using only the bound address, if you do not bind on a > > local address (the autobind case), and multihoming is enabled, then all > > available addresses will be used. > > > [Vipul] -- If this is the case one host is working as server and I am > doing bind on that for IP 127.4.252.1 and the other host is always > acting as client and in this I just do connect(). > So Client will bind with all IP addresses, in this case I am not clear > why & how private IP is not coming for the accociation and why public > IP is coming in this association? Can you post the code that you are using to set up this connection? > I have also tries with "echo "2" > > /proc/sys/net/sctp/addr_scope_policy" which even doesn't allow the > association with private IP. for both (private & public IP) the server > receiver end receives the connection reset by peer. > Can you provide a tcpdump of this as well? Neil > > Neil > > > > > -- > -=vipsy > http://through-dlens.blogspot.in > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
