netdev - Re: [net-next,1/2] add iovnl netlink support

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:	Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:19:32 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...hat.com>
Cc:	Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next,1/2] add iovnl netlink support

On Tuesday 20 April 2010, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Arnd Bergmann (arnd@...db.de) wrote:
> > On Tuesday 20 April 2010, Chris Wright wrote:
> >
> > After thinking some more about this case, I now believe we should do
> > it the other way around, and have lldpad in control of this interface
> > from the user space side, and letting user programs (lldptool, libvirt,
> > ...) talk to lldpad in order to set it up.
> 
> lldpad won't be involved in all cases, yet a mgmt tool like libvirt will.
> so this seems backwards.

Well, that part is still the matter of this discussion, as far as I can tell ;-)

> > But that's only the case if the NIC itself is in VEPA mode. If that
> > were the case, there would be no need for a kernel interface at all,
> > because then we could just drive the port profile selection from user
> > space.
> > 
> > The proposed interface only seems to make sense if you use it to
> > configure the NIC itself! Why should it care about the port profile
> > otherwise?
> 
> In the case of devices that can do adjacent switch negotiations directly.

I thought the idea to deal with those devices was to beat sense into
the respective developers until they do the negotiation in software 8-)

> > > > Same here: Should you be able to set multiple MAC addresses, or
> > > > trunk mode? Can the VF override it?
> > > > Also, for the new multi-channel VEPA, I'd guess that you also need
> > > > to supply an 802.1ad S-VLAN ID.
> > > 
> > > Something like set_port_profile() would initiate the negotiation for the
> > > s-vlan id for a particular channel, not sure it's needed as part of the
> > > netlink interface or not.
> > 
> > Well, you have to set up the s-vlan ID in order to have something to
> > set the port profile in.
> 
> Right, depends if the use the port profile to establish the channel and
> negotiate the s-vlan ID.  I don't recall the order there.

I'm pretty sure that setting up the channel (for 802.1bg) is done before
any port profile comes in.

	Arnd
--
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