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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4B7F96AE.1010102@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:00:46 +0800 From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> CC: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Developers <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com> Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v4 3/3] net: reserve ports for applications using fixed port numbers Eric Dumazet wrote: > Le jeudi 18 février 2010 à 00:13 +0800, Cong Wang a écrit : > >> I don't think so, if you want to avoid race condition, you just need to >> write the reserved ports before any networking application starts, IOW, >> as early as possible during boot. >> > > Sure, but I was thinking retrieving the list of reserved port by a > database query, using network :) > > Anyway, I just feel your argument is not applicable. > > Our kernel is capable of doing an intersection for us, we dont need > to forbid user to mark a port as 'reserved' if this port is already > blacklisted by another mechanism (for example, if this port is already > in use) > Oh, I see your points. But this still could make people confused, like me. I think we'd better document this. Thanks. -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists