linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] bridge: multicast to unicast

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:   Tue, 10 Jan 2017 22:27:25 +0100
From:   Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     "M. Braun" <michael-dev@...i-braun.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bridge: multicast to unicast

On 2017-01-10 11:56, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 05:18 +0100, Linus Lüssing wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 01:30:32PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> > I wonder if MAC80211 should be doing IGMP snooping and not bridge
>> > in this environment.
>> 
>> In the long term, yes. For now, not quite sure.
> 
> There's no "for now" in the kernel. Code added now will have to be
> maintained essentially forever.
I'm not sure that putting the IGMP snooping code in mac80211 is a good
idea, that would be quite a bit of code duplication.
This implementation works, it's very simple, and it's quite flexible for
a number of use cases.

Is there any remaining objection to merging this in principle (aside
from potential issues with the code)?

- Felix