| 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: <1294668505.3583.9.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:08:25 +0100 From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> To: hadi@...erus.ca Cc: Vlad Dogaru <ddvlad@...edu.org>, Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] net: add device groups On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 09:00 -0500, jamal wrote: > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 14:41 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > Can you explain the purpose of this? I'm wondering if it would make > > sense to automatically group all virtual interfaces belonging to a > > single 802.11 device, for instance. > > It depends what you want to do with that grouping. > In a nutshell, this greatly reduces the amount of kernel-user netlink > traffic in presence of multi interfaces. > you can do things like: > > ip link set dev ppp0 group 1 > ... > ... > ip link set dev pppN group 1 > > ip link ls group 1 > ip link set down group 1 > ip link set mtu 512 group 1 > etc Right, but where would you want to use it -- what's the use case right now? Your ppp example here makes me think the use case is some PPP endpoint server that has lots of these interfaces. It also means the grouping is entirely user-space controlled. In this case, the idea of automatically grouping based on the device structure seems pointless. johannes -- 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