RFC2710 (MLDv1), section 3.7. says:

  The length of a received MLD message is computed by taking the
  IPv6 Payload Length value and subtracting the length of any IPv6
  extension headers present between the IPv6 header and the MLD
  message. If that length is greater than 24 octets, that indicates
  that there are other fields present *beyond* the fields described
  above, perhaps belonging to a *future backwards-compatible* version
  of MLD. An implementation of the version of MLD specified in this
  document *MUST NOT* send an MLD message longer than 24 octets and
  MUST ignore anything past the first 24 octets of a received MLD
  message.

RFC3810 (MLDv2), section 8.2.1. states for *listeners* regarding
presence of MLDv1 routers:

  In order to be compatible with MLDv1 routers, MLDv2 hosts MUST
  operate in version 1 compatibility mode. [...] When Host
  Compatibility Mode is MLDv2, a host acts using the MLDv2 protocol
  on that interface. When Host Compatibility Mode is MLDv1, a host
  acts in MLDv1 compatibility mode, using *only* the MLDv1 protocol,
  on that interface. [...]

While section 8.3.1. specifies *router* behaviour regarding presence
of MLDv1 routers:

  MLDv2 routers may be placed on a network where there is at least
  one MLDv1 router. The following requirements apply:

  If an MLDv1 router is present on the link, the Querier MUST use
  the *lowest* version of MLD present on the network. This must be
  administratively assured. Routers that desire to be compatible
  with MLDv1 MUST have a configuration option to act in MLDv1 mode;
  if an MLDv1 router is present on the link, the system administrator
  must explicitly configure all MLDv2 routers to act in MLDv1 mode.
  When in MLDv1 mode, the Querier MUST send periodic General Queries
  truncated at the Multicast Address field (i.e., 24 bytes long),
  and SHOULD also warn about receiving an MLDv2 Query (such warnings
  must be rate-limited). The Querier MUST also fill in the Maximum
  Response Delay in the Maximum Response Code field, i.e., the
  exponential algorithm described in section 5.1.3. is not used. [...]

That means that we should not get queries from different versions of
MLD. When there's a MLDv1 router present, MLDv2 enforces truncation
and MRC == MRD (both fields are overlapping within the 24 octet range).

Section 8.3.2. specifies behaviour in the presence of MLDv1 multicast
address *listeners*:

  MLDv2 routers may be placed on a network where there are hosts
  that have not yet been upgraded to MLDv2. In order to be compatible
  with MLDv1 hosts, MLDv2 routers MUST operate in version 1 compatibility
  mode. MLDv2 routers keep a compatibility mode per multicast address
  record. The compatibility mode of a multicast address is determined
  from the Multicast Address Compatibility Mode variable, which can be
  in one of the two following states: MLDv1 or MLDv2.

  The Multicast Address Compatibility Mode of a multicast address
  record is set to MLDv1 whenever an MLDv1 Multicast Listener Report is
  *received* for that multicast address. At the same time, the Older
  Version Host Present timer for the multicast address is set to Older
  Version Host Present Timeout seconds. The timer is re-set whenever a
  new MLDv1 Report is received for that multicast address. If the Older
  Version Host Present timer expires, the router switches back to
  Multicast Address Compatibility Mode of MLDv2 for that multicast
  address. [...]

That means, what can happen is the following scenario, that hosts can
act in MLDv1 compatibility mode when they previously have received an
MLDv1 query (or, simply operate in MLDv1 mode-only); and at the same
time, an MLDv2 router could start up and transmits MLDv2 startup query
messages while being unaware of the current operational mode.

Given RFC2710, section 3.7 we would need to answer to that with an MLDv1
listener report, so that the router according to RFC3810, section 8.3.2.
would receive that and internally switch to MLDv1 compatibility as well.

Right now, I believe since the initial implementation of MLDv2, Linux
hosts would just silently drop such MLDv2 queries instead of replying
with an MLDv1 listener report, which would prevent a MLDv2 router going
into fallback mode (until it receives other MLDv1 queries).

Since the mapping of MRC to MRD in exactly such cases can make use of
the exponential algorithm from 5.1.3, we cannot [strictly speaking] be
aware in MLDv1 of the encoding in MRC, it seems also not mentioned by
the RFC. Since encodings are the same up to 32767, assume in such a
situation this value as a hard upper limit we would clamp. We have asked
one of the RFC authors on that regard, and he mentioned that there seem
not to be any implementations that make use of that exponential algorithm
on startup messages. In any case, this patch fixes this MLD
interoperability issue.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>