netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC 00/24] IPVS: Add first IPv6 support to IPVS

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: <1219483206.10379.5.camel@ernie.internal.graemef.net>
Date:	Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:20:06 +0100
From:	Graeme Fowler <graeme@...emef.net>
To:	Julius Volz <juliusv@...gle.com>
Cc:	Sven Wegener <sven.wegener@...aler.net>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net, vbusam@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/24] IPVS: Add first IPv6 support to IPVS

On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 14:14 +0200, Julius Volz wrote:
> Yes, starting from scratch on another port sounds like a good idea.
> Losing sync ability totally isn't as bad as confusing an older kernel
> with new messages, so I hope it's not necessary to keep the old
> baggage around?

I agree - having a new sync daemon which can deal with v6 entries aswell
as v4 entries would be a good way to work; the legacy code can then be
retired at a later date with minimal end-user impact.

> Is there enough motivation for doing this though before having a
> cleaned-up minimal v6 version without the sync daemon? This is where
> I'm currently a bit stuck with... any help is appreciated :)

Well, as someone else mentioned on lvs-users recently "I couldn't code
my way out of a wet paper bag in C" so I'm not much help on that front,
however I feel that getting the minimal working feature set going first
and then adding the sync code later is probably a good way to proceed.

This also gives us a development timeline that we can offer to
interested parties, along the lines of:

2008-10 Minimal IPv6 functionality
2008-?? Full IPv6 functionality matching IPv4 features, no IPv6 sync
2009-?? Restructured sync daemon with full IPv4 and IPv6 support

Horms, Joe - do you agree that this is a good idea?

Graeme

--
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