netdev - Re: IPoIB: Fix multicast packet drops before join is complete

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: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0906041150590.3204@gentwo.org>
Date:	Thu, 4 Jun 2009 11:52:48 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc:	rdreier@...co.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, yosefe@...taire.COM
Subject: Re: IPoIB: Fix multicast packet drops before join is complete

On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, David Miller wrote:

> I don't think using an infinite backlog for this is wise.

The number of packets is limited by the size of the sendbuffer. Its not
unlimited but under user control.

> We don't do this for ARP, for example.  We have a 3 packet limit just
> like IPoIB implements for multicast here.

ARP is a management protocol with specific semantics. Socket protocols are
dealing with streams of datagrams.

> I'm all for increasing those limits, but eliminating them I cannot
> agree with.

If these limits are lower than the socket sendbuffer size then the packets
will be dropped without the app being stopped. If they are set higher then
the application will block after the sendbuffer size has been reached.

--
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