netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: Fix RPF to work with policy routing

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: <20091022.214943.105371652.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hadi@...erus.ca
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, atis@...rotik.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	zenczykowski@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Fix RPF to work with policy routing

From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:13:39 -0400

> On Sun, 2009-10-18 at 08:12 -0400, jamal wrote:
>> policy routing never worked with mark.
> 
> I meant policy routing, mark and RPF never worked together ;->

Is this actually valid?

Such a change has a built-in assumption, I think, that
marks are symmetric.

Just because we ended up with mark X on input doesn't mean
that the reverse path route exists with mark X too.

In fact I can't even see a valid way to specify a mark for
the RPF lookup.

Maybe you can convince me otherwise :-)
--
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