netdev - Re: net.ipv6.conf.INT.accept_ra_rt_info_max

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.0902160827570.28957@netcore.fi>
Date:	Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:31:34 +0200 (EET)
From:	Pekka Savola <pekkas@...core.fi>
To:	Teran McKinney <sega01@...il.com>
cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: net.ipv6.conf.INT.accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen defaults to 0

Let me add to what DaveM said:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Teran McKinney wrote:
>> It seems that it is disabled like this by default when
>> accept_ra_rtr_pref is enabled, and that seems pretty reasonable to me.

accept_ra_rtr_pref is about router preferences. 
accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen is about more specific routes.  They are 
defined in the same RFC, and probably many implementers implement them 
at the same time.  However, there is no logical connection between the 
two, and making the default value of one depend on the default value 
of the other doesn't seem to make sense to me.

Even if we didn't enable accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen by default, I 
don't think it should depend on the value of accept_ra_rtr_pref.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
--
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