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]

Message-ID: <CAOxq_8M=Ros56U_VbUVumjS226jHs1DK0A-K9aRksTMu88H_sg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 8 Jan 2015 12:13:11 -0800
From:	Ani Sinha <ani@...sta.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.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, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:

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

Well, that is a strange argument! Nobody complained for a long time
that live capturing with vlan tagged packets were broken in tcpdump
because how the kernel started putting the tags in the aux data. But
someone eventually one day did notice that the issue was brought up.

>
> If you want to use network namespaces, you have to adapt your scripts.
>
> Nobody claimed network namespaces were totally transparent.
>

I see. I am going back to an old thread here where Linus says that the
#1 rule is:

""We don't regress user space"

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/16/565

Breaking scripts seems to me to fall into the category of regressing
userspace. Or may be we can treat these sysctls more softly since they
are not strictly speaking linux ABIs.
--
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