netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 7/8] mpls: Multicast route table change notifications

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: <54EEC967.20106@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:	Wed, 25 Feb 2015 23:21:11 -0800
From:	roopa <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	santiago@...reenet.org,
	Vivek Venkatraman <vivek@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 7/8] mpls: Multicast route table change notifications

On 2/25/15, 9:19 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Unlike IPv4 this code notifies on all cases where mpls routes
> are added or removed as that was the simplest to implement.
>
> In particular routes being removed because a network interface
> goes down or is removed are notified about.  Are there technical
> arguments for handling this differently ? Userspace developers
> don't particularly like the way IPv4 handles route removal
> on ifdown.
that is true. However, from previous emails on this topic on netdev,
there is no reason to notify these deletes to userspace thereby creating 
a notification storm
when userspace can figure this out. Which seems like a valid reason.
(Your approach resembles IPv6 which does generate these notifications 
and userspace is usually happy with this).

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