[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150302143647.GC7418@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 15:36:47 +0100
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>
Cc: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 0/2] net: Introducing socket mark receive
socket option
Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> wrote:
> > Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com> wrote:
> >> This patch set introduces a new socket option for fetching the mark
> >> of skbs passed to sockets as ancillary data.
> >>
> >> A userspace program may wish to receive the mark of packets it
> >> receives, for example for distinguishing between different TPROXY
> >> diversion rules to the same userspace proxy socket.
> >
> > Hmm... Whats the use case?
> > Even if you cannot use multiple sockets for every divert rule,
> > TPROXY doesn't mangle payload; applications could use sockaddrs
> > returned by accept, getpeername, getsockname etc. to figure out
> > which original port/address the packet was sent to?
>
> Right. But that would mean the criteria for traffic diversion would need to
> be known to the application receiving the traffic.
For your solution to work the application needs to know about the TPROXY
rule set and how that is structured, no?
I don't see how that is 'better' than e.g. looking at dst port number.
> Also, the feature has use-cases outside of TPROXY as the skb->mark may be set
> by other mechanisms (including SO_MARK from user space).
Right, but to me it seems very hacky to use SO_MARK as some kind of OOB signal.
It won't work depending on loaded ruleset, it won't work with non-localhost
traffic and it won't work when other application runs in another network
namespace.
Seems such facility would be limited to some pre-configured distribution where
users don't run own software and make no changes to the default system
setup.
> For example, a user space daemon can receive traffic from multiple
> applications using a single socket and distinguish between different traffic groups
> according to the packet mark.
Right, but it might as well use SO_PEERCRED to identify the other pid, right?
--
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