linux-kernel - Re: AF_BUS socket address family

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 01 Jul 2012 14:45:45 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Cc:	vincent.sanders@...labora.co.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: AF_BUS socket address family

From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 15:16:59 +0100

>> The issue is that what to do when a receiver goes deaf is a policy
>> issue.
> 
> Something all these protocols alredy recognize and have done for years.
> The real issue for AF_BUS versus the current slow AF_UNIX approach is
> that you really need to know *who* is blocked up.
> 
> That's no different to UDP multicast and needing to know how errored the
> frame.

And the policy on what to do about such UDP multicast errors is in
userspace, which is precisely my point.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/