netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] 8021q: validate SAN MAC address

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1352860896.6276.88.camel@LTIRV-MCHAN1.corp.ad.broadcom.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:41:36 -0800
From:	"Michael Chan" <mchan@...adcom.com>
To:	"John Fastabend" <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>, eilong@...adcom.com,
	ariele@...adcom.com
cc:	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] 8021q: validate SAN MAC address

On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 17:58 -0800, John Fastabend wrote: 
> On 11/13/2012 5:50 PM, Michael Chan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 20:24 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@...adcom.com>
> >> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:40:29 -0800
> >>
> >>> I suppose we can just put the SAN MAC into the real netdev->dev_addr so
> >>> that the VLAN will automatically get it.  But this doesn't seem very
> >>> nice as we would be pretending to have a normal MAC address (for
> >>> networking) in this SAN device.  The networking MAC address is in a
> >>> different PCI function.
> >>
> >> I certainly would prefer if you took that approach.  At least in that
> >> way the addressing of the netdev objects would appear more consistent.
> >>
> > Ok.  To be more complete, I think we need to add a flag or something to
> > such a netdev to indicate that it is a SAN device only.  What's your
> > opinion on that?
> 
> Michael, how do you determine a L2 packet is a SAN type? Do you have
> ACLs in the FW/hardware to prevent other types of L2 traffic from being
> sent? I guess I'm asking what makes it a SAN only device.
> 
Adding Eilon and Ariel from the bnx2x team to help answer the question.
I think we use ndo_select_queue() to put all FCoE related packets onto
the proper ring that is programmed with the proper DCB parameters.
Packets to the other rings will be dropped on such a device.

That's why a flag will be useful so that tools will know its limitation.


> 


--
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