netdev - Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] inter address family IPsec tunnel on the fly

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: <20080306.231947.135681188.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 06 Mar 2008 23:19:47 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	kazunori@...azawa.org
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, usagi-core@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] inter address family IPsec tunnel on the fly

From: Kazunori MIYAZAWA <kazunori@...azawa.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:32:09 +0900

> David Miller wrote:
> > I also wonder if the PF_KEY limitation really exists.  For example we
> > will set x->sel.family etc. from the SADB_EXT_ADDRESS_PROXY attribute
> > if present.
> > 
> 
> Yes, we have SADB_EXT_ADDRESS_PROXY. But it is not enough, I think.
> xfrm_selector has both src and dst so that we need some way to
> specify the address is src or dst.
> 
> from RFC2367

Thank you for this information.

> > Finally, if the determination can be made in the data path, it
> > by definition could be made during rule insertion which is much
> > more efficient and appropriate.
> 
> I agree with you.

I am sure there is a simple solution to this problem somewhere,
it is just hiding :-)

Anyways, since I will be in Japan we can discuss alternate
implementation schemes.

Thank you for working on this problem.
--
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