netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/4] bridge: Fix problems around the PVID

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]

Message-Id: <20130912.160033.779509034953932316.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 12 Sep 2013 16:00:33 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	makita.toshiaki@....ntt.co.jp
Cc:	vyasevic@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/4] bridge: Fix problems around the PVID

From: Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@....ntt.co.jp>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 19:27:54 +0900

> There seem to be some undesirable behaviors related with PVID.
> 1. It has no effect assigning PVID to a port. PVID cannot be applied
> to any frame regardless of whether we set it or not.
> 2. FDB entries learned via frames applied PVID are registered with
> VID 0 rather than VID value of PVID.
> 3. We can set 0 or 4095 as a PVID that are not allowed in IEEE 802.1Q.
> This leads interoperational problems such as sending frames with VID
> 4095, which is not allowed in IEEE 802.1Q, and treating frames with VID
> 0 as they belong to VLAN 0, which is expected to be handled as they have
> no VID according to IEEE 802.1Q.
> 
> Note: 2nd and 3rd problems are potential and not exposed unless 1st problem
> is fixed, because we cannot activate PVID due to it.

Please work out the issues in patch #2 with Vlad and resubmit this
series.

Thank you.

--
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