linux-kernel - Re: [net-next PATCH v4 3/3] net: reserve ports for applications using fixed port numbers

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]

Message-Id: <201002171801.07333.opurdila@ixiacom.com>
Date:	Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:01:07 +0200
From:	Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Developers <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v4 3/3] net: reserve ports for applications using fixed port numbers

On Wednesday 17 February 2010 18:39:28 you wrote:
> Le jeudi 18 février 2010 à 00:13 +0800, Cong Wang a écrit :
> > I don't think so, if you want to avoid race condition, you just need to
> > write the reserved ports before any networking application starts, IOW,
> > as early as possible during boot.
> 
> Sure, but I was thinking retrieving the list of reserved port by a
> database query, using network :)
> 
> Anyway, I just feel your argument is not applicable.
> 
> Our kernel is capable of doing an intersection for us, we dont need
> to forbid user to mark a port as 'reserved' if this port is already
> blacklisted by another mechanism (for example, if this port is already
> in use)
> 

Also I believe that ip_local_port_range purpose is not to reserve *specific* 
ports. Changing this setting helps with things like increasing the port space 
for NAT or for a higher connection rate.

We add the new option for reserving *specific* ports. 

So, even from a functional perspective, it makes more sense to me to keep them 
independent, as they serve different purposes.
--
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/