netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] Implement IP_UNICAST

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: <1328283793.2157.33.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC>
Date:	Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:43:13 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	"Erich E. Hoover" <ehoover@...es.edu>
Cc:	Linux Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Implement IP_UNICAST_IF socket option.

Le vendredi 03 février 2012 à 08:21 -0700, Erich E. Hoover a écrit :
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 3:01 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > BTW, do we really want the htonl() thing, and force device indexes in
> > 2^24 range ? This seems odd anyway.
> > ...
> 
> I can easily perform both of these steps in Wine.  The 2^24 limitation
> in particular seems artificial, and especially silly to add to the
> kernel if it will change the fundamental range of the indices.  With
> regard to htonl(), David Miller indicated that the API should match
> what other systems use (a 32-bit network byte order word), though he
> may not have meant his comment that specifically.  I can see the
> merits of doing it both ways and I'm not particularly attached to
> either one.

I have no strong feeling, I only wanted to point out our current device
indexes range is [1 .. (2^31 - 1) ]



--
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