netdev - Re: [PATCHv3 net-next 2/3] sunvnet: allow admin to set sunvnet MTU

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]

Date:	Sat, 13 Sep 2014 16:21:01 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	david.stevens@...cle.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net-next 2/3] sunvnet: allow admin to set sunvnet MTU

From: David L Stevens <david.stevens@...cle.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 12:00:55 -0400

> This patch allows an admin to set the MTU on a sunvnet device to arbitrary
> values between the minimum (68) and maximum (65535) IPv4 packet sizes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David L Stevens <david.stevens@...cle.com>

I personally find this scheme where we pretend that the device can
have an arbitrary MTU, when in fact the effective MTU is a product of
the sub-ports, quite ugly.

In fact, that ugly ICMP stuff in the next patch is absolutely required
to avoid bogus behavior possible after this patch.  You have to
combine #2 and #3 otherwise you are adding an intermediate regression.

Logic wise, at the very least you should limit the MTU setting to the
largest MTU of all of the individual ports.
--
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