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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:03:11 +0200 From: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com> To: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: [Q] ipv6: RTM_GETROUTE interpretation of RTA_IIF Hi, In IPv4, if the RTA_IIF attribute is specified in an RTM_GETROUTE message, then a route is searched as if a packet was received on the specified iif interface - i.e. 'inet_rtm_getroute()' calls 'ip_route_input()'. However in IPv6, RTA_IIF is not interpreted in the same way: 'inet6_rtm_getroute()' always calls 'ip6_route_output()', regardless the RTA_IIF attribute. As a result, in IPv6 there's no way to use RTM_GETROUTE in order to look for a route as if a packet was received on a specific interface. I'd like to modify 'inet6_rtm_getroute()' so that RTA_IIF is interpreted in the same way as in IPv4's 'inet_rtm_getroute()'. Before I come up with a patch, I'd like to know whether current interpretation of RTA_IIF in 'inet6_rtm_getroute()' is deliberate. Regards, Shmulik -- 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