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: <55a4f86e0910222330l7eda29ffr9949b9a635c97649@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:30:19 -0700
From:	Maciej Żenczykowski <zenczykowski@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	hadi@...erus.ca, netdev@...r.kernel.org, atis@...rotik.com,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Fix RPF to work with policy routing

In most of the use cases I've seen marking packets has been far from
symmetric (of course: not that this is representative of anything).
Although, to be fair, most of the time this is because packets in only
direction (usually trasmit) were even being marked in the first place.

However, I do agree that .mark should be explicitly initialized (or a
comment about it being left =0 inserted in the same location).

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 21:49, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> 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