netdev - Re: Should ICMP echo responses be 'bound to the interface' of the incoming ICMP echo request?

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <814591.62002.qm@web56601.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Date:	Thu, 7 Apr 2011 20:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
From:	andrei radulescu-banu <iubica2@...oo.com>
To:	swmike@....pp.se, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	ketil@...yn.name, linux-net@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Should ICMP echo responses be 'bound to the interface' of the incoming ICMP echo request?

Thanks for the correction about the limit on the # of route domains, David.

Andrei

--- On Thu, 4/7/11, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
> Subject: Re: Should ICMP echo responses be 'bound to the interface' of the incoming ICMP echo request?
> To: swmike@....pp.se
> Cc: iubica2@...oo.com, ketil@...yn.name, linux-net@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Date: Thursday, April 7, 2011, 10:44 PM
> From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@....pp.se>
> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 03:02:53 +0200 (CEST)
> 
> > On Thu, 7 Apr 2011, andrei radulescu-banu wrote:
> > 
> >> But here's a problem: the kernel supports only up
> to 256 route
> >> domains, and I'd like to be able to use more
> interfaces than that,
> >> physical plus virtual.
> > 
> > Sounds like that 256 limit should be the thing to be
> looked into then.
> 
> That limit was removed ages ago.
> 
> I notice that when discussions occur on this list, a lot of
> misinformation
> gets spread around.
> 
> The problem is that the actual networking developers don't
> read this list,
> they read netdev@...r.kernel.org
> instead.
> 
> Maybe it's time that we just get rid of linux-net because
> it's been nothing
> but problematic as users search for information on it and
> very few people
> on that list are knowledgable enough to even consider
> answering.
> 
> 
--
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