netdev - Re: [RFC] ipv4: Do not cache routing failures due to disabled forwarding.

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 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:	Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:03:28 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	nicolas.cavallari@...en-communications.fr
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org,
	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: [RFC] ipv4: Do not cache routing failures due to disabled
 forwarding.

From: Nicolas Cavallari <nicolas.cavallari@...en-communications.fr>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 16:14:20 +0200

> If we cache them, the kernel will reuse them, independently of
> whether forwarding is enabled or not.  Which means that if forwarding is
> disabled on the input interface where the first routing request comes
> from, then that unreachable result will be cached and reused for
> other interfaces, even if forwarding is enabled on them.
> 
> This can be verified with two interfaces A and B and an output interface
> C, where B has forwarding enabled, but not A and trying
> ip route get $dst iif A from $src && ip route get $dst iif B from $src
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Cavallari <nicolas.cavallari@...en-communications.fr>
> ---
> based on net-next, but not really tested on top of it.

Sorry Nicolas, this seems to have fallen on the floor.  Could you please
resubmit your most uptodate version of this patch so I can apply it?

Thanks.
--
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