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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 08:34:13 +0000 From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: force a fresh timestamp for ingress packets On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 09:08:17AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Le vendredi 17 décembre 2010 ?? 07:30 +0000, Jarek Poplawski a écrit : > > > It is wrong because it brings back the inconsistency with ping etc. > > described by Alex Sidorenko in the changelog of netem patch, but > > use normal (not netem) ingress scheduling (ping results shouldn't > > depend on sniffers). > > Care to explain why only netem should take care of this delaying > problem ? > If a packet is delayed on other qdisc, dont we have the same problem ? netem was treated as a special case just to pretend (lie) about the net outside (still not depending on sniffers), but it's hard to believe there are "normal" ping users after netem. > > Right now, ping lies, giving different results if a sniffer is active or > not. > > Care to suggest an alternative patch, because I am lost at this point ? Just what I wrote earlier: consider one additional cloning in dev_queue_xmit_nit or maybe resetting the timestamp with act_skbedit? Thanks, Jarek P. -- 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