netdev - Re: [PATCH -next] net: preserve geometry of fragment sizes when forwarding

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: <20150518.195105.2072041210798369557.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 18 May 2015 19:51:05 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	fw@...len.de
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, hannes@...essinduktion.org,
	edumazet@...gle.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] net: preserve geometry of fragment sizes when
 forwarding

From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 23:33:29 +0200

> Thanks for spending time on this.

Ok, I've heard what you have to say.

Of the fixes you've proposed already, I prefer the device MTU one
because it doesn't penalize the ip_fragment.c optimizations just
because a netfilter module is loaded.

Which of your already proposed patches do you prefer, and why?

I'm happy to apply one or the other as an interim step to make
forward progress.  However, I really want to seriously consider
our long term handling of fragments in netfilter meanwhile.

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