netdev - Re: [Patch net-next] ipv6: separate out procfs code from mcast.c

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: <1366781184.3849.10.camel@cr0>
Date:	Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:26:24 +0800
From:	Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] ipv6: separate out procfs code from mcast.c

On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 13:26 -0400, David Stevens wrote:
> BTW, another thing I thought of after I sent my patch comments -- you
> also need to consider the state of net.ipv6.bindv6only. When v6 is
> enabled, you use one socket for v4 and v6, but if bindv6only=1, you
> actually need a separate socket for v4 receives. If you want to support
> both v4 and v6 with bindv6only=1, you need two sockets. Or even if you
> want to support v4-only VXLAN and the sysadmin has set bindv6only=1.
> 

Good point!

Actually the initial version of my patch did use two sockets for v4 and
v6. I am adding this to my TODO list.

Thanks!

--
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