summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorFan Du <fan.du@windriver.com>2013-12-16 18:47:50 +0800
committerSteffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>2013-12-16 12:54:05 +0100
commitb3c6efbc36e2c5ac820b1a800ac17cc3e040de0c (patch)
tree7453efb8d488acf759dc1b7f9473077a6b881f8b
parent776e9dd90ca223b82166eb2835389493b5914cba (diff)
xfrm: Add file to document IPsec corner case
Create Documentation/networking/ipsec.txt to document IPsec corner issues and other info, which will be useful when user deploying IPsec. Signed-off-by: Fan Du <fan.du@windriver.com> Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
-rw-r--r--Documentation/networking/ipsec.txt38
1 files changed, 38 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/networking/ipsec.txt b/Documentation/networking/ipsec.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..8dbc08b7e431
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/networking/ipsec.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+
+Here documents known IPsec corner cases which need to be keep in mind when
+deploy various IPsec configuration in real world production environment.
+
+1. IPcomp: Small IP packet won't get compressed at sender, and failed on
+ policy check on receiver.
+
+Quote from RFC3173:
+2.2. Non-Expansion Policy
+
+ If the total size of a compressed payload and the IPComp header, as
+ defined in section 3, is not smaller than the size of the original
+ payload, the IP datagram MUST be sent in the original non-compressed
+ form. To clarify: If an IP datagram is sent non-compressed, no
+
+ IPComp header is added to the datagram. This policy ensures saving
+ the decompression processing cycles and avoiding incurring IP
+ datagram fragmentation when the expanded datagram is larger than the
+ MTU.
+
+ Small IP datagrams are likely to expand as a result of compression.
+ Therefore, a numeric threshold should be applied before compression,
+ where IP datagrams of size smaller than the threshold are sent in the
+ original form without attempting compression. The numeric threshold
+ is implementation dependent.
+
+Current IPComp implementation is indeed by the book, while as in practice
+when sending non-compressed packet to the peer(whether or not packet len
+is smaller than the threshold or the compressed len is large than original
+packet len), the packet is dropped when checking the policy as this packet
+matches the selector but not coming from any XFRM layer, i.e., with no
+security path. Such naked packet will not eventually make it to upper layer.
+The result is much more wired to the user when ping peer with different
+payload length.
+
+One workaround is try to set "level use" for each policy if user observed
+above scenario. The consequence of doing so is small packet(uncompressed)
+will skip policy checking on receiver side.