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  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:	Mon, 29 Sep 2014 06:34:09 -0600
From:	David Ahern <>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <>
	"" <>,
	Stephen Hemminger <>
Subject: Re: VRFs and the scalability of namespaces

Hi Eric

On 9/26/14, 7:25 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> When you say "proper VRF support" what I hear is that you think
> something new needs to be added to the linux network stack (called a
> VRF) with a new userspace interface that somehow because it lacks
> features is better.

 From my perspective the existing mechanisms do not seem to provide a 
sufficient solution for VRFs.

>> Before droning on even more, does the above provide better context on
>> the general problem?
> It provides a rough context on what you are trying to do.  Use linux as
> the OS to run on a switch.
> It doesn't actually provide much in the way of context actual problems
> that show up when you try to use network namespaces.  Which is what I
> was expecting the discussion would be about, and which would I expect be
> a productive conversation.

I don't know how else to explain it beyond what I said in the first 
email. I listed several specific examples of how namespaces are not an 
appropriate model for VRFs. Do you disagree on any of those points? Need 
clarification on any of them? ie., What more were you expecting?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists