netdev - Re: PF_RING: Include in main line kernel?

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: <20091014.132911.174712308.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	deri@...p.org
Cc:	bcook@...intsys.com, brad.doctor@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PF_RING: Include in main line kernel?

From: Luca Deri <deri@...p.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:26:25 +0200

> I agree that some PF_RING features could be merged into
> PF_PACKET. However PF_RING is not just about improving packet capture
> but it implements facilities that can be used by many monitoring
> applications including, packet balancing, reflection, layer-7 packet
> filtering, pf_ring socket clustering just to name a few. You can read
> about PF_RING feature into this tutorial:
> http://luca.ntop.org/IM2009_Tutorial.pdf

I've already researched several times what PF_RING does and
is capable of doing, and my position still stands that none of
it can't be added to existing facilities.

It's been an out of tree hack for years, and if it stays as
a seperate facility it's likely to stay that way.
--
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