Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > On 2023/11/15 05:59, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > Otto Moerbeek <o...@drijf.net> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 12:42:46PM +0100, Luca Di Gregorio wrote: > > > > > > > # uname -a > > > > OpenBSD XXXXX.my.domain 7.4 GENERIC#0 amd64 > > > > > > > > # ifconfig vxlan0 tunnel SOURCE_IP DEST_IP:8472 vnetid 5 > > > > # ifconfig vxlan0 inet 192.168.5.1/30 > > > > # ifconfig vxlan0 up > > > > > > > > # ifconfig vxlan0: I can't see the dest UDP port 8472 anywhere > > > > vxlan0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 > > > > lladdr fe:e1:ba:d9:e4:0b > > > > index 18 llprio 3 > > > > encap: vnetid 5 parent none txprio 0 rxprio outer > > > > groups: vxlan > > > > tunnel: inet SOURCE_IP --> DEST_IP ttl 1 nodf > > > > Addresses (max cache: 100, timeout: 240): > > > > inet 192.168.5.1 netmask 0xfffffffc broadcast 192.168.5.3 > > > > > > > > # ping 192.168.5.2 > > > > > > > > In tcpdump, I see that arp packets are sent to UDP port 4789, not 8472: > > > > SOURCE_IP.4789 > DEST_IP.4789: VXLAN vni 5: arp who-has 192.168.5.2 > > > > tell > > > > 192.168.5.1 [ttl 1] > > > > > > > > Is this a bug? > > > > > > It helps to read the vxlan(4) manpage, specifcially the paragraph abouts > > > ports. > > > > Is there any reason to allow people to use non-standard ports? Equipment > > that > > does this is rare. > > pre-RFC implementations used 8472
That doesn't answer the question. I checked all the devices i have, none of them can do 8472. So they must be very rare. Why does OpenBSD need to interop with them?
