Bug#514644: ipv6: net.ipv6.conf.*.temp_valid_lft counter seems to overflow

[Moritz Muehlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org>]

On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 08:36:49PM +0100, Piotr Lewandowski wrote:
> Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-686
> Version: 2.6.26-13
> Severity: normal
> 
> #v+
> # dev="wire"
> # ip link set $dev down
> # sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.$dev.use_tempaddr=2
> net.ipv6.conf.wire.use_tempaddr = 2
> # sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.$dev.max_desync_factor=0
> net.ipv6.conf.wire.max_desync_factor = 0
> # sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.$dev.temp_valid_lft=9
> net.ipv6.conf.wire.temp_valid_lft = 9
> # sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.$dev.temp_prefered_lft=6
> net.ipv6.conf.wire.temp_prefered_lft = 6
> # ip address flush dev $dev 2>/dev/null
> # ip link set $dev up
> # for x in `seq 1 25`; do sleep 1; ip -6 a sh dev $dev secondary | grep _lft; done
>        valid_lft 9sec preferred_lft 604800sec
>        valid_lft 8sec preferred_lft 604799sec
>        valid_lft 6sec preferred_lft 604797sec
>        valid_lft 5sec preferred_lft 604796sec
>        valid_lft 4sec preferred_lft 604795sec
>        valid_lft 3sec preferred_lft 604794sec
>        valid_lft 2sec preferred_lft 604793sec
>        valid_lft 1sec preferred_lft 604792sec
>        valid_lft 0sec preferred_lft 604791sec
>        valid_lft forever preferred_lft 604790sec
>        valid_lft 4294967294sec preferred_lft 604789sec
>        valid_lft 4294967293sec preferred_lft 604788sec
>        valid_lft 4294967292sec preferred_lft 604787sec
>        valid_lft 4294967291sec preferred_lft 604786sec
>        valid_lft 4294967290sec preferred_lft 604785sec
>        valid_lft 4294967289sec preferred_lft 604784sec
>        valid_lft 4294967288sec preferred_lft 604783sec
>        valid_lft 4294967287sec preferred_lft 604782sec
>        valid_lft 4294967286sec preferred_lft 604781sec
>        valid_lft 4294967285sec preferred_lft 604780sec
>        valid_lft 4294967284sec preferred_lft 604779sec
> #v-
> 
> It doesn't seems to be caused by relatively low value of
> temp_valid_lft, since I've succeed to reproduce this behaviour with
> temp_valid_lft = 200.

Hi,
The next release of Debian (6.0, code name Squeeze) will be based
on 2.6.32. Please test the current 2.6.32 from unstable/testing and tell
us whether the problem persists. If so, we should report it upstream
to the kernel.org developers.

The 2.6.32 kernel is available from packages.debian.org and can
be installed in both Debian stable, testing and unstable
installations.

Thanks,
        Moritz