The FDP team is no longer accepting new bugs in Bugzilla. Please report your issues under FDP project in Jira. Thanks.
Bug 2162083 - [OSP17.0][OVN][MTU] IPv6 traffic ignores logical switch external_ids neutron:mtu and logical router port gateway_mtu settings
Summary: [OSP17.0][OVN][MTU] IPv6 traffic ignores logical switch external_ids neutron:...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Fast Datapath
Classification: Red Hat
Component: OVN
Version: FDP 22.G
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
high
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: OVN Team
QA Contact: Jianlin Shi
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2023-01-18 17:56 UTC by Miro Tomaska
Modified: 2023-09-19 04:32 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-02-06 16:41:22 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Issue Tracker FD-2638 0 None None None 2023-01-20 14:38:03 UTC

Description Miro Tomaska 2023-01-18 17:56:22 UTC
It appears there is a regression from the BZ1846300 we have closed in 16.1.
According to testing mentioned in BZ1839847 comment 10 the issue still repdroduces in RHOSP 17.0.

To reproduce the issue follow comment#3 from BZ 1839847. I am going to paste it here

Reproducing steps:
I have virtual bridges on hypervisor allowing 9000 and all interfaces on nodes allowing mtu 9000.
I configured external network with mtu set to 1500.
Test1  If I send a big ipv4 packet with size 8800 from vm on the internal network it is not passing to the external network (dropped) - OK
Test2, If send a big ipv6 packet with size 8800 from vm on the internal network it is passing to the external network (single big full size packet just reaches) - not as expected, because configured neutron mtu and/or logical switch external_ids neutron:mtu are ignored. 
Test3, If I send a bigger ipv6 packet with size 8900 it is not reached (it's expected) but path mtu discovery is not working (see tracepath6 output) - not OK, according to the mail from Anita that you mentioned it is expected to be working somehow ("MTU path discovery should already handle it"). But as I wrote above we can create a separate BZ (RFE) for this issue.

Comment 1 lorenzo bianconi 2023-01-24 18:51:23 UTC
(In reply to Miro Tomaska from comment #0)
> It appears there is a regression from the BZ1846300 we have closed in 16.1.
> According to testing mentioned in BZ1839847 comment 10 the issue still
> repdroduces in RHOSP 17.0.
> 
> To reproduce the issue follow comment#3 from BZ 1839847. I am going to paste
> it here
> 
> Reproducing steps:
> I have virtual bridges on hypervisor allowing 9000 and all interfaces on
> nodes allowing mtu 9000.
> I configured external network with mtu set to 1500.
> Test1  If I send a big ipv4 packet with size 8800 from vm on the internal
> network it is not passing to the external network (dropped) - OK
> Test2, If send a big ipv6 packet with size 8800 from vm on the internal
> network it is passing to the external network (single big full size packet
> just reaches) - not as expected, because configured neutron mtu and/or
> logical switch external_ids neutron:mtu are ignored. 
> Test3, If I send a bigger ipv6 packet with size 8900 it is not reached (it's
> expected) but path mtu discovery is not working (see tracepath6 output) -
> not OK, according to the mail from Anita that you mentioned it is expected
> to be working somehow ("MTU path discovery should already handle it"). But
> as I wrote above we can create a separate BZ (RFE) for this issue.

Are you using DVR scenario? If so, can you please check the configured MTU of the physical NICs used to access the underlay network (localnet interfaces)? If not, can you please check the MTU size of each interfaces used to carry geneve traffic? In both cases they should be over the gateway configured MTU (OVN gateway_mtu).
Moreover, can you please share OVN nb/sb dbs?

Comment 2 Miro Tomaska 2023-02-06 16:41:22 UTC
Hi Lorenzo,

I discussed this issue with Slawek who mentioned in BZ18939847 comment#10 that he was able to reproduce it in 17.0 but does not remember the setup. Roman who originally filled the BZ does not also recall how to reproduce it. Finally, i was not able to reproduce it. I am just going to close this BZ as "insufficient data"

Comment 3 Red Hat Bugzilla 2023-09-19 04:32:36 UTC
The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 120 days


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.