netdev - Re: LRO restructuring?

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]

Date:	Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:50:58 -0400
From:	Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@...i.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org, brice@...i.com
Subject: Re: LRO restructuring?

David Miller wrote:
> From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@...i.com>
> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:30:33 -0400
> 
>> Last, have you considered simply allowing "inexact" forwarding, where
>> the ingress NIC is doing LRO and the egress nic is doing TSO?  You
>> loose exact framing information (eg, what you emit might not be framed
>> exactly as you receive it), but you can still do filtering, and the
>> host overhead is very low.
> 
> Intermediate nodes are not supposed to change the transport layer
> checksum if at all possible, especially on routers.

Indeed.  Nor should they change lengths, or anything else.
Everything about this "inexact" forwarding is illegal as
hell.  However, you have to admit that it is an interesting hack :)

Drew
--
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