netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] udp: increment UDP_NO_PORTS when dropping unmatched multicasts

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <542C3F1C.2080108@hp.com>
Date:	Wed, 01 Oct 2014 10:51:24 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
CC:	davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] udp: increment UDP_NO_PORTS when dropping unmatched
 multicasts

On 10/01/2014 10:43 AM, David L Stevens wrote:
>
>
> On 10/01/2014 01:32 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
>
>> It would be an added statistic for "ignored" UDP multicast datagrams, incremented instead of UDP_MIB_NOPORTS.  "UDP_MIB_IGNOREDMULTI" if you will.
>>
>> Similar in concept to what HP-UX NIC drivers would increment when they received a frame for which there was no bound protocol - "inbound unknown protocols" but not a drop
>> http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/chap1_0130428167/elementLinks/01fig16.gif
>
> I guess I'm ok with that.
>
> Ideally, it wouldn't be affected by running a sniffer, so I think best would be to increment
> NOPORTS when someone has joined the group on the interface and IGNOREDMULTI when nobody has,
> but I'm not sure it's worth the trouble to check. So I'm good with that, or IGNOREDMULTI all
> the time.


Eric -

What is your feeling?  I have a UDP_MIB_NOPORTS v2 with UDP lite, fixed 
inner_flushed and IPv6 I can post now, or I can tweak it to add an 
IGNOREDMULTI stat and use that instead of NOPORTS.  If taking the 
IGNOREDMULTI path, I'd be inclined to go with consume_skb() 
unconditionally since the philosophy would be that it is an ignored 
packet rather than a drop (similar to the recent change in ARP).

rick

--
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