netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC] inetpeer: Support ipv6 addresses.

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: <20100328.064012.193708716.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sun, 28 Mar 2010 06:40:12 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] inetpeer: Support ipv6 addresses.

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 21:11:12 +0800

> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 05:53:12AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
>> Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 16:22:50 +0800
>>
>> > My main question is how do we deal with source-address policy
>> > routing in a host cache?
>> 
>> We don't, the same like how we don't handle fully specified
>> IPSEC policies deciding upon the route.
> 
> I thought we did handle source-address policy routing for PMTU
> messages at least.  I just checked ip_rt_frag_needed and it does

Same for all the other metrics at the TCP level.

I guess this is the decision we have to make, what does
"host level" metrics mean for us if we decide to move
things into the inetpeer cache.

--
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