netdev - Re: IPv6 routing type - not at par with IPv4 one?

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]

Date:	Thu, 06 Sep 2012 12:35:05 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@....fi>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
Subject: Re: IPv6 routing type - not at par with IPv4 one?

On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 10:02 +0000, Markus Stenberg wrote:
> ~ # ip route add throw 1.2.3.4
> ~ # ip -6 route add throw ::1.2.3.4
> RTNETLINK answers: No such device
> ~ # ip route add blackhole 1.2.3.5
> ~ # ip -6 route add blackhole ::1.2.3.5
> RTNETLINK answers: No such device
> ~ #
> 
> The reason for this is in net/ipv6/route.c - ipv6_route_add:
> 
> Eventually code winds up at this (1423 line in 3.5.3):
> 
> 	err = -ENODEV;
> 	if (!dev)
> 		goto out;
> 
> and poof, ENODEV.
> 
> Is there some reason for this? Or should I write a patch? 
> Or does someone else want to? Support for dev=NULL 
> elsewhere in the code seems to be ok.
> 
> Based on quick googling I'm not the first one to have encountered this.

Well, it  seems you missed this : 

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git;a=commitdiff;h=ef2c7d7b59708d54213c7556a82d14de9a7e4475

At least the blackhole is now supported on IPv6, so you probably have to
add the 'throw' bit, if it makes any sense.



--
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