@@ -1248,22 +1248,6 @@ int icmp_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb)
goto reason_check;
}
- if (icmph->type == ICMP_EXT_ECHOREPLY) {
- reason = ping_rcv(skb);
- goto reason_check;
- }
-
- /*
- * 18 is the highest 'known' ICMP type. Anything else is a mystery
- *
- * RFC 1122: 3.2.2 Unknown ICMP messages types MUST be silently
- * discarded.
- */
- if (icmph->type > NR_ICMP_TYPES) {
- reason = SKB_DROP_REASON_UNHANDLED_PROTO;
- goto error;
- }
-
/*
* Parse the ICMP message
*/
@@ -1290,6 +1274,22 @@ int icmp_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb)
}
}
+ if (icmph->type == ICMP_EXT_ECHOREPLY) {
+ reason = ping_rcv(skb);
+ goto reason_check;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * 18 is the highest 'known' ICMP type. Anything else is a mystery
+ *
+ * RFC 1122: 3.2.2 Unknown ICMP messages types MUST be silently
+ * discarded.
+ */
+ if (icmph->type > NR_ICMP_TYPES) {
+ reason = SKB_DROP_REASON_UNHANDLED_PROTO;
+ goto error;
+ }
+
reason = icmp_pointers[icmph->type].handler(skb);
reason_check:
if (!reason) {
There is no point processing ICMP_EXT_ECHOREPLY for routes which would drop ICMP_ECHOREPLY (RFC 1122 3.2.2.6, 3.2.2.8) This seems an oversight of the initial implementation. Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> --- net/ipv4/icmp.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)