netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/10] af_unix: add multicast and filtering features to AF

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:	Thu, 01 Mar 2012 04:26:42 -0800
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, rodrigo.moya@...labora.co.uk,
	javier@...labora.co.uk, lennart@...ttering.net,
	kay.sievers@...y.org, alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk,
	bart.cerneels@...labora.co.uk, sjoerd.simons@...labora.co.uk,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/10] af_unix: add multicast and filtering features to
 AF_UNIX

Le jeudi 01 mars 2012 à 12:57 +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas a écrit :

> Yes, you are right it doesn't follow AF_UNIX semantics so Unix sockets
> is not the best place to add our multicast implementation.
> 

Right, AF_UNIX is already a nightmare to maintain.

> So, now we are trying a different approach. To create a new address
> family AF_MCAST. That way we can have more control over the semantics of
> the socket interface for that family.
> 
> We expect to have some patches in a few days and we will resend.
> 
> Does this makes more sense to you?
> 

Why adding an obscure set of IPC mechanism in network tree, and not
using (maybe extending) traditional IPC (Messages queues, semaphores,
Shared memory, pipes, futexes, ...).



--
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