netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC] Per route TCP options

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: <4ADEC5E8.9060205@codefidence.com>
Date:	Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:27:20 +0200
From:	Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...efidence.com>
To:	Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, ori@...sleep.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Per route TCP options

Hi,


Bill Fink wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
>
>   
>> Turn the global sysctls allowing disabling of TCP SACK, DSCAK,
>> time stamp and window scale into per route entry feature options,
>> laying the ground to future removal of the relevant global sysctls.
>>
>> You really only want to disable SACK, DSACK, time stamp or window
>> scale if you've got a piece of broken networking equipment somewhere 
>> as a stop gap until you can bring a big enough hammer to deal with
>> the broken network equipment. It doesn't make sense to "punish" the
>> entire connections going through the machine to destinations not 
>> related to the broken equipment.
>>     
>
> For certain test situations, it is sometimes desirable to globally
> disable TCP timestamps.  Although I have not personally wanted to
> globally disable the other mentioned features, I can imagine test
> scenarios where it could be useful.  Admittedly it could also be
> accomplished with per route features, just not as conveniently,
> especially if there are a large number of interfaces and/or routes.
>
>   
I don't feel that strongly about it either way, just trying to hearken to
Linus "Linux is bloated" message by not fostering duplicate ways to do
the same thing... ;-)

If the consensus is to adopt the route features but leave the global
kill switches, I certainly have no problem with that.

Thanks,
Gilad

-- 
Gilad Ben-Yossef
Chief Coffee Drinker & CTO
Codefidence Ltd.

Web:   http://codefidence.com
Cell:  +972-52-8260388
Skype: gilad_codefidence
Tel:   +972-8-9316883 ext. 201
Fax:   +972-8-9316884
Email: gilad@...efidence.com

Check out our Open Source technology and training blog - http://tuxology.net

	"Sorry cannot parse this, its too long to be true  :)"
	  -- Eric Dumazet on netdev mailing list

--
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