netdev - Re: Weak host model vs .interface down

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:	Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:13:42 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Weak host model vs .interface down

> The weak model doesn't go into such detail, it is assumption/impl. detail
> to assume that the ip address still is part of the system even when the interface
> is down. One could just as well define interface down as temporarly removing
> the IP address from the system too. This makes make much more sense to me and
> if you always want the system to answer on a IP adress you make it an IP alias.
> 
> Since the current behaviour is a problem to me and routers in general, can
> we change this? What is the current usage model which needs it to stay as is?

Router != end-system  so I wouldn't think the weak or strong end-system model 
would apply to a router.  I think Stephen already posted a patch to allow that 
for when one's box was a router rather than an end-system.

rick jones
It's a router!
No, it's an end-system!
...
http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75ishimmer.phtml
--
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