netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC] ipv6: fix route selection if kernel is not compiled with CONFIG_IPV6_ROUTER

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]

Message-ID: <51E0527D.2030205@6wind.com>
Date:	Fri, 12 Jul 2013 21:01:17 +0200
From:	Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	petrus.lt@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] ipv6: fix route selection if kernel is not compiled
 with CONFIG_IPV6_ROUTER_PREF

Le 12/07/2013 18:19, Hannes Frederic Sowa a écrit :
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 02:04:45PM +0200, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
>> It's possible to add a glue to check this counter when we play with these
>> flags, but it's ugly.
>>
>> Maybe the check against RTF_EXPIRES is fundamentally wrong. Checking
>> RTF_ADDRCONF|RTF_DYNAMIC should be enough, what do you think?
>
> Yes, this seems to be the best option now. I will audit the source if
> RTF_ADDRCONF and RTF_DYNAMIC are immutable after dst construction and
> if other errors could arise for that and would go with this solution then.
>
> What do you think about making ecmp routes explicit by adding RTF_ECMP
> flag?
Why not, but you will have to be careful on insertion and deletion. Next hop can 
be added one by one and deleted one by one.

>
>> In another hand, we can discuss about the initial assumption, that was
>> "only static routes are part of ECMP routes". I'm thinking of what are the
>> consequence if we accept to accept all routes, without checking any flags.
>
> I don't have a good feeling about that. But I may be wrong.
Same for me, but for now, I don't have any argument ;-) The above solution is 
probably the better way for now.


Nicolas
--
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