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: <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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists