netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/4 net-next] net: phy: add Generic Netlink Ethernet switch configuration API

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: <5270F474.3000702@openwrt.org>
Date:	Wed, 30 Oct 2013 12:58:44 +0100
From:	Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>
To:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>, mbizon@...ebox.fr
CC:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>,
	Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>,
	Gary Thomas <gary@...assoc.com>,
	Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4 net-next] net: phy: add Generic Netlink Ethernet switch
 configuration API

On 2013-10-30 12:50, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On 10/29/13 19:12, Maxime Bizon wrote:
> 
>>
>>  From a user POV, when you see a netdevice, you expect to be able to
>> receive or send packets from/to it. The ability to read stats/link is
>> only a secondary feature.
>>
> 
> The important part is all the APIs stay consistent. I can use
> same netlink calls. ifconfig works.
> iproute2 works. People have written books on this stuff - we dont
> have MCSE(Must Call Software Engineer) certification, but this is
> as close as it gets. i.e the knowledge has been commoditized, even
> my kid knows how to use these tools.
> 
> If i can get stats by doing ifconfig - that should provide illusion that
> the netdevice is sending/receiving packets.
Pretty much all of the above have serious limitations when you're not
actually able to run the data path through the per-port netdevs.
You can't assign IP addresses to them. The network stack will probably
even attempt to assign IPv6 link-local addresses to these things,
causing even more confusion.
You can't add them to normal software bridges like other devices.
You can't use bonding. I could probably go on for a while.
There's a huge list of things that you simply cannot do with these
interfaces, and without knowing the details of the implementation, users
will be left clueless as to why that is.
I'd say that's a very serious violation of the principle of least surprise.
And knowing what the typical OpenWrt users do with their devices, I can
already forsee the bogus bug reports trickling in, if this is to be
implemented.

- Felix
--
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