netdev - Re: Linux IPv6 DAD not full conform to RFC 4862 ?

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: <20080110.084655.66182071.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
Date:	Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:46:55 +0900 (JST)
From:	YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 
	<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
To:	davem@...emloft.net
Cc:	kkeil@...e.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: Linux IPv6 DAD not full conform to RFC 4862 ?

In article <20080109.153212.144388472.davem@...emloft.net> (at Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:32:12 -0800 (PST)), David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> says:

> I question any RFC mandate that shuts down IP communication on a node
> because of packets received from remote systems.

RFC4862 tell us that we SHOULD disable IP communication.
(IP means IPv6 here; IPv4 is out of scope.)
In IETF term, a SHOULD is almost a MUST.  We are required to follow
unless we have very good reason to ignore it.

> If the TAHI test can trigger this, so can a compromised system on your
> network and won't that be fun? :-)

So, I know the specification, but I have ignored it.
I think it is fine to implent in some way, but I do think we must have
a switch not to do this.

--yoshfuji
--
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