netdev - Re: ARP table question

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: <491B5452.6020709@candelatech.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:10:26 -0800
From:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
To:	NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: ARP table question

Ben Greear wrote:
> I have 500 mac-vlans on a system talking to 500 other
> mac-vlans.  My problem is that the arp-table gets extremely
> huge because every time an arp-request comes in on all mac-vlans,
> a stale arp entry is added for each mac-vlan.  I have filtering
> turned on, but that doesn't help because the neigh_event_ns call
> below will cause a stale neighbor entry to be created regardless
> of whether a replay will be sent or not.
> 
> Maybe the neigh_event code should be below the checks for dont_send,
> and only create check neigh_event_ns if we are !dont_send?

The attached patch makes it work much better for me.  The patch
will cause the code to NOT create a stale neighbor entry if we
are not going to respond to the ARP request.  The old code
*would* create a stale entry even if we are not going to respond.

This is against 2.6.25.15.

Signed-off-by:  Ben Greear<greearb@...delatech.com>

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


View attachment "patch0.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1047 bytes)