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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 03 Apr 2017 19:19:19 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/2] New kernel function to get IP overhead
 on a socket.

From: "R. Parameswaran" <>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 19:12:20 -0700 (PDT)

> Hi Dave,
> Please see inline:
> On Mon, 3 Apr 2017, David Miller wrote:
>> From: "R. Parameswaran" <>
>> Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 13:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Can I take this to mean that we do need to factor in IP options in 
>> > the L2TP device MTU setup (i.e approach in the posted patch is okay)? 
>> > 
>> > If yes, please let me know if I can keep the socket IP option overhead 
>> > calculations in a generic function, or it would be better to move it back into 
>> > L2TP code? 
>> If the user creates and maintains this UDP socket, then yes we have to
>> account for potential IP options.
> Can I take this to mean that the patch in its present form is 
> acceptable (patch currently accounts for IP options on the socket)? 
> Please let me know if any further change is needed (I'll clean up the 
> krobot reported errors after this).

Yes, please respin the patch with the krobot errors fixed.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists