netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] net: L2 only interfaces

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <A41B4B28-7D28-4BFB-AD4F-508C24AB82CA@holtmann.org>
Date:	Tue, 25 Aug 2015 21:24:49 -0700
From:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	f.fainelli@...il.com, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	andrew@...n.ch, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	jiri@...nulli.us, sfeldma@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] net: L2 only interfaces

Hi Dave,

>> This patch series implements a L2 only interface concept which
>> basically denies any kind of IP address configuration on these
>> interfaces, but still allows them to be used as configuration
>> end-points to keep using ethtool and friends.
>> 
>> A cleaner approach might be to finally come up with the concept of
>> net_port which a net_device would be a superset of, but this still
>> raises tons of questions as to whether we should be modifying
>> userland tools to be able to configure/query these
>> interfaces. During all the switch talks/discussions last year, it
>> seemed to me like th L2-only interface is closest we have to a
>> "network port".
>> 
>> Comments, flames, flying tomatoes welcome!
> 
> Interesting, indeed.
> 
> Do you plan to extend this to defining a more minimal network device
> sub-type as well?
> 
> Then we can pass "net_device_common" or whatever around as a common
> base type of actual net device "implementations".
> 
> Or is you main goal just getting the L2-only semantic?

the other end of this could be also an IP only net_device where we do not have ethtool semantics.

We do have a need for a IPv6 only net_device when utilizing ARPHRD_6LOWPAN for 802.15.4 and Bluetooth LE. Skipping in_dev initialization there might be an interesting step towards that. Not sure how much entangled in_dev and in6_dev still are. If it works for IFF_L2_ONLY, it might work also in the other direction.

Regards

Marcel

--
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