netdev - Re: (Lack of) specification for RX n-tuple filtering

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: <1291833578.17102.69.camel@lb-tlvb-vladz>
Date:	Wed, 8 Dec 2010 20:39:38 +0200
From:	"Vladislav Zolotarov" <vladz@...adcom.com>
To:	"Ben Hutchings" <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
cc:	"Dimitris Michailidis" <dm@...lsio.com>,
	"Peter Waskiewicz" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: (Lack of) specification for RX n-tuple filtering

> > The
> > semantics for a specification of the steam is also quite different. For
> > instance, how do u define a rule to drop all packets with source IP
> > address 192.168.10.200 by means of RXNFC?
> 
> Something like this, I think:
> 
> struct ethtool_rxnfc insert_rule = {
> 	.cmd = ETHTOOL_SRXCLSRLINS,
> 	.flow_type = IP_USER_SPEC,
> 	.fs = {
> 		.flow_type = IP_USER_SPEC,
> 		.h_u.usr_ip4_spec = {
> 			.ip4src = inet_aton("192.168.10.200"),
> 			.ip_ver = ETH_RX_NFC_IP4
> 		},
> 		.m_u.usr_ip4_spec = {
> 			.ip4dst = 0xffffffff,
> 			.l4_4_bytes = 0xffffffff,
> 			.tos = 0xff,
> 			.proto = 0xff
> 		},
> 		.ring_cookie = RX_CLS_FLOW_DISC,
> 		.location = 0,
> 	}
> };
> 

Aha. Ok. From the remarks in the upstream ethtool.h I see now that
ethtool_rxnfc has quite wide configuration possibilities (including the
above). I missed it before. ;)

Ben, could u, pls., explain me then what's the difference between
defining the rule as u wrote above on top of -N option (nfc) and
defining the rule doing the same thing on top on -U (n-tuple) option and
when I as a user should prefer one option to another? Are they expected
to be implemented differently from FW/HW perspective?

thanks,
vlad

P.S. I see that ethtool.h from the 2.6.36 tree already has the
ethtool_rxnfc that would allow such a filtering definition however from
the man page of the 2.6.36 version of the ethtool package it's unclear
what should be a command line for such a configuration. Is it supported
with the current ethtool version or maybe I'm missing something in a man
page?

--
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