netdev - Re: XFRM and IPv6 raw sockets and multicast

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: <9c46321e0712040801w72e31178t940ca70ccfd8a14a@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 4 Dec 2007 17:01:43 +0100
From:	"Hugo Santos" <hugosantos@...il.com>
To:	"YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明" 
	<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: XFRM and IPv6 raw sockets and multicast

Hi,

On Dec 4, 2007 4:52 PM, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org> wrote:
> What do you mean by "ipv6 header"?

  If IPPROTO_RAW is set, we supply the ipv6 header, extensions and payload.

> I think hdrincl is broken (and even, say, deprecated) on IPv6.

  By IPv6 you mean the protocol, or Linux's implementation of it?
Although there are APIs that allow applications to build and supply
the extension headers to the network stack, i think the ability to
provide the full ipv6 packet is also useful for some use cases.

> If we do really support it, if hdcincl is set, XFRM and other
> all extension header processes should be skipped, but they are
> not very clear at all so far.

  I understand how some users of IPPROTO_RAW would want xfrm to be
skipped, but on the other hand i also see the interoperation between
the two as useful, to for instance allowing a ESP tunnel to be used by
such packets.

  Hugo
--
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