netdev - Re: [PATCH net-2.6] bonding: drop frames received with master's source MAC

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: <4D6C1764.1040008@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:45:08 +0100
From:	Nicolas de Pesloüan 
	<nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>
To:	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>,
	Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>, Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-2.6] bonding: drop frames received with master's	source
 MAC

Le 28/02/2011 17:32, Andy Gospodarek a écrit :
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 12:08:03AM +0100, Nicolas de Pesloüan wrote:
>> Le 25/02/2011 23:24, Andy Gospodarek a écrit :
> [...]
>>>
>>> I confirmed your suspicion, this breaks ARP monitoring.  I would still
>>> welcome other opinions though as I think it would be nice to fix this as
>>> low as possible.
>>
>> Why do you want to fix it earlier that in ndisc_recv_ns drop? Your
>> original idea of silently dropping the frame there seems perfect to me.
>>
>
> Maybe it's just me, but I cannot understand why we want a bunch of extra
> packets floating up into the stack when they may only create issues for
> the recipients of these duplicate frames.
>
> Clearly my original patch needs to be refined so ARP monitoring still
> works, but I would rather fix the issue there than in a higher layer.

Jay explained that the current implementation should already trap those frames, on inactive slaves, 
in modes where inactive slaves exist. I agree with him.

What mode are you seeing this problem in? If the current "should drop" logic is leaking, then yes, 
we should fix it. But we currently don't see where it is leaking.

	Nicolas.



--
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