netdev - Re: [IPV6]: Fix IPsec datagram fragmentation

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <OF3737A582.CBFC60B5-ON882573F0.002BE602-882573F0.002C7307@us.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:05:32 -0800
From:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, kazunori@...azawa.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [IPV6]: Fix IPsec datagram fragmentation

I think the field name is kind of confusing here. It appears
that "local_df == 1" means "allow fragmentation" and
"local_df == 0" means "don't fragment". But "DF" to me
means "don't fragment", as in "IP_DF", so the field value
is backwards from what I'd expect. And maybe that's
what happened to in your patch, too, Herbert.

For the future, maybe we should rename that, or reverse
the sense of it (in v4 as well). :-)

                                        +-DLS

--
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