netdev - Re: [PATCH 19/25] mlx4: Randomizing mac addresses for slaves

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]

Date:	Wed, 4 Nov 2009 23:33:28 +0200
From:	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc:	Yevgeny Petrilin <yevgenyp@...lanox.co.il>,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	liranl@...lanox.co.il, tziporet@...lanox.co.il
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/25] mlx4: Randomizing mac addresses for slaves

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 10:04 PM, Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com> wrote:
>> +#define MLX4_MAC_HEAD               0x2c9000000ULL

> Is this a good idea?  You're basically choosing 24 random bits within your OUI...
> seems the chance of collision with another MAC used on the same network is
> high enough that it could easily happen in practice on a moderately big network.

yes, this has been brought by Stephen and others on this last back on
September 11th, this year @
http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=125263488409128

> Can you pick a reserved range or something?

Using different OUI for the VF device wouldn't help either I think,
since the #VF becomes fairly big even on a modest side cluster with
(say) a VM consuming VF per 1-2 cores.

Or.
--
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