netdev - Re: [RFC] ECN and IP defragmentation

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: <20110104.185305.226784718.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 04 Jan 2011 18:53:05 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] ECN and IP defragmentation

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 01:13:51 +0100

> It seems ip_fragment.c doesnt comply with RFC3168, section 5.3
> 
> 5.3.  Fragmentation
> 
>    ECN-capable packets MAY have the DF (Don't Fragment) bit set.
>    Reassembly of a fragmented packet MUST NOT lose indications of
>    congestion.  In other words, if any fragment of an IP packet to be
>    reassembled has the CE codepoint set, then one of two actions MUST be
>    taken:
> 
>       * Set the CE codepoint on the reassembled packet.  However, this
>         MUST NOT occur if any of the other fragments contributing to
>         this reassembly carries the Not-ECT codepoint.
> 
>       * The packet is dropped, instead of being reassembled, for any
>         other reason.
>
> Should we fix this ?

Definitely, yes.
--
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