netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] fib_rules: add .suppress operation

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

Date:	Wed, 31 Jul 2013 17:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	stefan.tomanek@...tarbyte.de
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, hannes@...essinduktion.org,
	bsderandrew@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fib_rules: add .suppress operation

From: Stefan Tomanek <stefan.tomanek@...tarbyte.de>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 02:24:07 +0200

> Dies schrieb David Miller (davem@...emloft.net):
> 
>> I just want to mention that the more quirky crap we put into the FIB
>> rules layer, the harder it will every be to make a scalable data
>> structure for FIB rule handling.
>> 
>> Right now it's basically a linear walk of rules, with processing at
>> each level.
> 
> And it still is: but instead of just having pre-conditions whether to
> consult a table, the patch introduces post-conditions that can reject
> a routing decision retrieved from it.

This doesn't change my argument at all.  The fact remains that the
more complex conditions we add to the fib rule lookup, the harder it
will be to optimize fib rule lookups into an O(1) or O(log n)
operation.
--
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