netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: implement rt_genid_bump_ipv6 with fn_sernum and remove rt6i

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: <20140910.130929.247064282043941043.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 10 Sep 2014 13:09:29 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hannes@...essinduktion.org
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: implement rt_genid_bump_ipv6 with
 fn_sernum and remove rt6i_genid

From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:31:28 +0200

> In case we need to force the sockets to relookup the routes we now
> increase the fn_sernum on all fibnodes in the routing tree. This is a
> costly operation but should only happen if we have major routing/policy
> changes in the kernel (e.g. manual route adding/removal, xfrm policy
> changes).

Core routers can update thousands of route updates per second, and they
do this via what you refer to as "manual route adding/removal".

I don't think we want to put such a scalability problem into the tree.

There has to be a lightweight way to address this.
--
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