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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 09:12:05 -0700 From: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com> To: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/4] net: ipv6: Improve user experience with multipath routes On 1/30/17 8:49 AM, Roopa Prabhu wrote: >> Single next hop delete will be around because IPv6 allows it -- and because IPv4 needs to support it. >> > understand single next hop delete for ipv6 will be around..and my only point was to leave it around but not optimize for that case. > I don't think we should support single nexthop delete in ipv4 (I have not seen a requirement for that)... ipv4 is good as it is right now. > the additional complexity is not needed. > IPv4 has a known bug -- delete a virtual interface in a multihop route and the entire route is deleted, including the nexthops for other devices. This does not happen for IPv6. Simple example of that bug: ip li add dummy1 type dummy ip li add dummy2 type dummy ip addr add dev dummy1 10.11.1.1/28 ip li set dummy1 up ip addr add dev dummy2 10.11.2.1/28 ip li set dummy2 up ip ro add 1.1.1.0/24 nexthop via 10.11.1.2 nexthop via 10.11.2.2 ip li del dummy2 --> the entire multipath route has been deleted. And, fixing this bug enables work to make IPv4 append to be sane -- appending a route should modify an existing route by adding the nexthop, not adding a new route that I believe can never actually be hit. Both cases mean modifying an IPv4 route -- adding or removing nexthops -- a capability that IPv6 allows so fixing this means closing another difference between the stacks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists