netdev - Re: [RFC] bridge: allow passing link-local multicast

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: <20110818093941.5ebf716b@nehalam.ftrdhcpuser.net>
Date:	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 09:39:41 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	Nick Carter <ncarter100@...il.com>
Cc:	Ed Swierk <eswierk@...switch.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	David Lamparter <equinox@...c24.net>,
	bridge@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] bridge: allow passing link-local multicast

On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:52:45 +0100
Nick Carter <ncarter100@...il.com> wrote:

> On 18 August 2011 16:10, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:06:19 +0100
> > Nick Carter <ncarter100@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Why can't we use the 802.1D specified STP group address to identify ?
> >> The existing code uses that address.
> >> I know you said on another thread that there are people using other addresses.
> >> Who are these people ?
> >> Are they following any standard ?
> >> What address / address range are they using ?
> >
> > The group address can be reprogrammed, and it is settable on other
> > routing equipment. People do it to create spanning tree domains.
> >
> But before the new
> +               if (!is_stp_bpdu(skb) && br_forward_link_local)
> check, we have already checked
> 	if (unlikely(is_link_local(dest))) {
> So the frame must have a link local destination.  If the reprogrammed
> group address is outside of the link local range then the new code in
> this patch will never be hit.  If the reprogrammed group address is in
> the link local range then i'd suggest my previous group_fwd_mask patch
> is cleaner and more flexible.

The problem is that the group_fwd_mask is specific to the address
not the protocol.
--
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