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 13:05:12 +0200
From:	"Julius Volz" <>
To:	"Simon Horman" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 00/24] Add first IPv6 support to IPVS

On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 3:25 AM, Simon Horman <> wrote:
> 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.

Great, many thanks!


Julius Volz - Corporate Operations - SysOps

Google Switzerland GmbH - Identification No.: CH-
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