netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: use interface mtu for determining if packet-too-big should be send

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: <20131217.164256.473228543329254152.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 17 Dec 2013 16:42:56 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hannes@...essinduktion.org
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: use interface mtu for determining if
 packet-too-big should be send

From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 15:01:24 +0100

> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 05:49:42AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 09:09 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>> > IPv6 forwarding path should also not depend on the path mtu values to
>> > judge if a packet should get dropped and an ICMP PTB should be returned.
>> > 
>> > For the accompanying change in IPv4, have a look at "ipv4: introduce
>> > ip_dst_mtu_secure and protect forwarding path against pmtu spoofing".
>> > 
>> 
>> No commit sha1 (truncated to 12 digits) ?
> 
> The patch is not yet committed.

It's confusing to propose an ipv6 version of an ipv4 patch that hasn't
been integrated yet, please don't do this.

I would suggest instead fo post the ipv4 and ipv6 variants together
when you want me to consider applying them, or to provide them as
a unit for review.
--
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