netdev - Re: MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with multiple bridge virtual interfaces?

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:	Mon, 09 Mar 2009 11:58:39 -0700
From:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
CC:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Mark Smith 
	<nanog@...5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	shemminger@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with multiple
 bridge virtual interfaces?

Patrick McHardy wrote:

>> Now that I think about it we could call ndo_start_xmit directly
>> from the macvlan code, and bypass whatever hook we use to
>> intercept packets going out the normal device it should not
>> be too difficult.
> 
> We don't intercept packets on TX, they have to be explicitly delivered
> to macvlan.

It might suck for performance, but mac-vlan could register an 'ALL' protocol
on the physical dev, similar to tcp-dump, to grab pkts on tx and pass the
ones it cares about back up to the vlans?

I'd want run-time control to disable any of these costly options for those that
don't need it, however.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html