New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 821229 link

Starred by 2 users

Issue metadata

Status: Archived
Owner: ----
Closed: May 2018
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Linux
Pri: 2
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

Chrome doesn't respect network interface metric weight, always defaults to WWAN when available

Reported by ru...@starset.net, Mar 13 2018

Issue description

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/66.0.3359.22 Safari/537.36

Example URL:

Steps to reproduce the problem:
1. Use ifmetric to specify a low weight for WLAN, and a higher weight for WWAN.
2. Connect to WLAN
3. Open Chrome
4. Go to https://www.whatismyip.com/
5. Observe IP address related to your WLAN uplink
6. Turn on and connect to WWAN interface
7. Refresh https://www.whatismyip.com/
8. Observe

What is the expected behavior?
Chrome respects the metric weight for the interfaces, continues to display the WLAN network's IP address, and continues to use WLAN for all connections.

What went wrong?
Chrome hops over to the WWAN interface, showing an IP address related to whatever LTE carrier the user has connected to, and pushes all traffic all the WWAN interface.

Did this work before? N/A 

Chrome version: 66.0.3359.22  Channel: dev
OS Version: Debian Sid 4.15.0-1-amd64
Flash Version: 

Everything else on my Debian respects the metric specified by ifmetric and hops over to Wifi when it's available in a number of different combinations of turning either interfaces on/off.

You can view the weights with route...

$ route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
default         208utah-usg     0.0.0.0         UG    150    0        0 wlp4s0
default         26.194.54.246   0.0.0.0         UG    200    0        0 wwp0s20f0u2i12
10.42.32.0      0.0.0.0         255.255.252.0   U     150    0        0 wlp4s0
26.194.54.244   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.252 U     200    0        0 wwp0s20f0u2i12
link-local      0.0.0.0         255.255.0.0     U     150    0        0 wlp4s0

wwp0s20f0u2i12 is my onboard wifi, wlp4s0 is a PCIe LTE modem with a Google Fi SIM card.

I've also played with Network Manager's "priority" however I believe that's only for priority racking WLAN connections on a given interface and not to rank interfaces.

The behavior I expect to see is if no other interfaces are available, use WWAN. If any other interfaces are available then don't use WWAN. I have literally blown about $50 at this point into Google Fi because I'd forgotten my WWAN interface was turned on through Network Manager while I'm sitting at work/home.
 

Comment 1 by ru...@starset.net, Mar 13 2018

I don't understand why Monorail asks for additional OS information but doesn't actually post itpost it.

I'm running Debian Sid 4.15.0-1-amd64, KDE Plasma 5.12.3-1, Network Manager 1.10.4-1+b1.

Thanks.

Comment 2 by ru...@starset.net, Mar 13 2018

Also realizing "weight" is the wrong term. "Priority" is more appropriate.

Comment 3 by ru...@starset.net, Mar 13 2018

I should note I'm able to also reproduce this with a fresh/clean instance of both Chromium and Chrome off the stable channel.
Labels: Needs-Triage-M66

Comment 5 by mattm@chromium.org, Mar 13 2018

Labels: Needs-Feedback
A lower "Metric" value is *higher* priority, so looking at your route output it looks like this is expected behavior. Try flipping the metric values and let us know if that works.

Comment 6 by ru...@starset.net, Mar 13 2018

Apologies, I described my interfaces wrong in the description of this bug...

wlp4s0 is my onboard wifi, wwp0s20f0u2i12 is a PCIe LTE modem with a Google Fi SIM card.

My routing table with WLAN enabled reads....

$ route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
default         208utah-usg     0.0.0.0         UG    150    0        0 wlp4s0
default         26.194.96.157   0.0.0.0         UG    200    0        0 wwp0s20f0u2i12
10.42.32.0      0.0.0.0         255.255.252.0   U     150    0        0 wlp4s0
26.194.96.156   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.252 U     200    0        0 wwp0s20f0u2i12
link-local      0.0.0.0         255.255.0.0     U     150    0        0 wlp4s0


And I set the metric value through...

$ cat /etc/network/if-up.d/ifmetric 
#!/bin/sh
if [ -x /usr/sbin/ifmetric -a "${IF_METRIC}" ]; then
    /usr/sbin/ifmetric "${IFACE}" "${IF_METRIC}"
fi

# Ethernet interfaces
ifmetric eth0 100
ifmetric enp0s31f6: 101
ifmetric enx0050b6d58fcc 102

# Wifi
ifmetric wlp4s0 150

# WWAN LTE
ifmetric wwp0s20f0u2i12 200
Project Member

Comment 7 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Mar 13 2018

Cc: mattm@chromium.org
Labels: -Needs-Feedback
Thank you for providing more feedback. Adding the requester to the cc list.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot

Comment 8 by mattm@chromium.org, Mar 13 2018

Labels: Needs-Feedback
Hm, ok. Can you capture a netlog demonstrating the issue as described here: https://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/for-testers/providing-network-details

You said this happens on stable, that would be M65? Do you know if it happened on earlier versions?
ping rubin@, can you post the information requested in c#8?

Comment 10 by ru...@starset.net, Apr 17 2018

Hi, sorry about the delay.

I just upgraded to a ThinkPad X480s and Lenovo isn't selling their flavor of a WWAN card yet (I also needed to give back the old X1 I had with the WWAN card). They hope to have one released this month.

Let me see if I have a spare USB WWAN dongle and if I can reproduce this issue again tonight.
Project Member

Comment 11 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Apr 17 2018

Labels: -Needs-Feedback
Thank you for providing more feedback. Adding the requester to the cc list.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
Labels: Needs-Feedback
Thanks! Re-adding the feedback label.

Comment 13 by ru...@starset.net, Apr 21 2018

I'm unable to reproduce this issue with a USB Sierra Wireless dongle. I'm still waiting on Lenovo to start selling a Sierra Wireless card for the new ThinkPad I got in order to re-test, currently no ETA. If you want to keep this ticket open, I can update once the new card has been released and I've received it. Otherwise if you want to close this bug out now, I'm happy to open a new bug if this is still an issue whenever I get the card.

Thanks.
Project Member

Comment 14 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Apr 21 2018

Cc: csharrison@chromium.org
Labels: -Needs-Feedback
Thank you for providing more feedback. Adding the requester to the cc list.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
Cc: vamshi.kommuri@chromium.org
Labels: Needs-Feedback Triaged-ET
From comment#13 by reporter the issue is not seen with a USB sierra wireless dongle, Hence waiting for responce on it's behaviour using a new card.

@Reporter: Please update your comments once you receive new card(...as per C#13), Hence adding label Needs-Feedback.

Thanks!

Comment 16 by rch@chromium.org, May 17 2018

Status: Archived (was: Unconfirmed)
Please feel free to file a new bug if you can provide the requested information.

Sign in to add a comment