netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: change fib behavior based on interface link status

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: <20150603201156.GM588@gospo.home.greyhouse.net>
Date:	Wed, 3 Jun 2015 16:11:56 -0400
From:	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
Cc:	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, ddutt@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: change fib behavior based on interface
 link status

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 12:03:53PM -0700, Scott Feldman wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Andy Gospodarek
> <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 11:15:55AM -0700, Scott Feldman wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Andy Gospodarek
> >> <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> >> > This feature is only enabled with the new sysctl set (default is off):
> >> > net.core.kill_routes_on_linkdown = 1
> >>
> >> One more thing, sorry.  This feature is typically implemented today in
> >> user-space on a per-interface basis.  The example I'm thinking of is
> >> Quagga's "link-detect" directive which goes on an interface.  Should
> >> this be a bool on each interface in systcl?  That would let user not
> >> enable on selected interfaces.
> > That would not be my preference.
> >
> > I'm willing to investigate the per-namespace support if Hannes would
> > like and add switchdev support for v2, but would prefer this not become
> > that granular.
> 
> 
> Is there a reason?  Seems you moving a feature from user space to the
> kernel, so I'm curious why you wouldn't want to mimic functionality
> that's available today.
To me it seemed like a feature that is more globally useful so I wanted
to just have it that way to start.  I'm not opposed to per-device
granularity in the future, but I did not want to differentiate right out
of the gate when there are enough other moving parts.

> I like the patch/feature, BTW.  Thanks for doing this.
Glad to hear it!  :)
--
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