netdev - Re: Netlink limitations

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: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1011081958410.31946@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Date:	Mon, 8 Nov 2010 20:21:26 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...radead.org>
cc:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, pablo@...filter.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Netlink limitations


On Monday 2010-11-08 16:16, Thomas Graf wrote:
>> 
>> Messages are not limited to 64k, individual attributes are. Holger
>> started working on a nlattr32, which uses 32 bit for the length
>> value.
>
>Also, it is not required to pack everything in attributes. Your protocol
>may specify that the whole message payload consists of chained attributes.
>Alternatively you may as well split your attribut chain and dump them
>as several messages.

Yeah with NETLINK_URELEASE that seems the way to go. However, what are
compelling arguments to use Netlink over other forms of bidirectional
communication? (To play devils advocate, one could use nlattr32/TLVs
over ioctl too.)
--
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