netdev - Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH] Multicast packet reassembly can fail]

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:	Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:22:51 -0700
From:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
To:	Steve Chen <schen@...sta.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, mhuth@...sta.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH] Multicast packet reassembly can fail]

netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org wrote on 10/28/2009 11:25:39 AM:

> I see the point you are making.  I assumed, probably incorrectly, that
> since eth0 and eth1 have different IP address.  I would get a complete
> series of fragments for each interface.  Perhaps, I should really be
> looking up the stack to see why packets were dropped.  Please correct me
> if I'm mistaken.  The normal behavior is that application should be
> receiving either 2 (scenario 1) or 1 (scenario 2) packets.

Steve,
        If you didn't join the group on both interfaces, you won't receive
two copies in the first place; the unjoined NIC won't deliver anything
up the stack that isn't in it's multicast address filter.

 +-DLS

--
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