netdev - Re: route/max_size sysctl in ipv4

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:	Thu, 08 Jan 2015 11:03:28 -0800
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Ani Sinha <ani@...sta.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: route/max_size sysctl in ipv4

On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 10:39 -0800, Ani Sinha wrote:

> But the whole point of keeping this sysctl still around is not to
> break the userland scripts! If we are trying to achieve that, I think
> we should go one step further and make sure that the sysctl is still
> available for reading even in child namespaces (as it used to be the
> case).


network namespaces make some sysctl disappear.

That is how it is since day 0.
Some scripts might even use this knowledge.

It is too late to change something now. Nobody but you ever complained.

If you want to use network namespaces, you have to adapt your scripts.

Nobody claimed network namespaces were totally transparent.


--
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