[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1416519074.8557.15.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 22:31:14 +0100
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: ja@....bg, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: ipv4: drop unicast encapsulated in L2 multicast
On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 10:54 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >> if (res.type == RTN_BROADCAST)
> >> goto brd_input;
> >
> > Is this place better, after checking for RTN_BROADCAST?
> >
> > /* ARP link-layer broadcasts are acceptable here */
> > if ((skb->pkt_type == PACKET_BROADCAST ||
> > skb->pkt_type == PACKET_MULTICAST) &&
> > skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP))
> > goto e_inval;
>
> Indeed, this would make ARP happier, but that still leaves open the
> issue of CLUSTERIP.
I'm back looking at this, but must admit I'm completely confused now :-)
I could add an IPv4 sysctl to control this behaviour:
0 - off
1 - RFC 1122 "SHOULD"
2 - also drop unicast-in-multicast (for wireless)
But I guess due to cluster-IP it would have to default to 0.
However, talk about ip_local_deliver_finish() in this thread has me
wondering if we could just implement it using iptables? I guess
ipt_addrtype and ip6t_addrtype would let me do that?
johannes
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists