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  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:	Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:25:55 +1000
From:	Simon Horman <>
To:	Julius Volz <>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 00/24] Add first IPv6 support to IPVS

On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 03:55:31PM +0200, Julius Volz wrote:
> Hi Horms,
> Here comes the whole batch again! I've fixed almost all style issues
> reported by, except for some little things which look like
> they could stay like they are for now (down to 3 warnings and 2 errors).
> I also integrated your other comments and removed the patch that
> adds the changelog information (not needed anymore, according to
> Stephen).
> These patches are based on lvs-2.6:
> git://
> - Full kernel patch in one file:
> While not all IPv6 features are working or tested, existing IPv4 features
> should still work as before. However, to use any of the new features, you
> will need a new ipvsadm with support for genetlink and IPv6:
>   (by Vince Busam)
> To enable IPv6 support in IPVS, set CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6=y.
> Short overview:
> What works with IPv6:
> - forwarding mechanisms: NAT, DR, maybe Tunnel (not fully tested yet)
> - protocols: TCP, UDP, ESP, AH (last two not tested)
> - manipulation and inspection of both IPv4 and IPv6 entries with ipvsadm
> - 6 out of 10 schedulers
> What is not supported with IPv6:
> - handling fragmentation or other extension headers
> - FTP application helper (can be loaded, but only operates on v4)
> - sync daemon (can be started, but only operates on v4)
> - probably some incorrect handling of ICMPv6 or other corner cases
> Since fragmentation and extension headers should not occur very often,
> things should "mostly" work. I tested HTTP and DNS over NAT and DR
> with various supported schedulers without encountering any problems.
> But we didn't test any exotic situations. Also, there are some TODOs
> in the code for things that haven't been tested or implemented yet.
> Thanks for any comments!

Hi Julius, Hi Vince,

I have applied all of these patches to the lvs-next-2.6 branch
of the lvs-2.6 tree and I will ask Dave to pull these into
net-next-2.6 shortly.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists