netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] bonding: use l4 hash if available

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: <1442370718.4116.43.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:31:58 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] bonding: use l4 hash if available

On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 17:15 -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:

> A more fundamental question is whether we can eliminate some of these
> hashing types (I see five of them in if_bonding.h). Is there any
> substantial difference between this and IPv4/v6 ECMP routing such that
> they shouldn't all have the same path selection modes?

We had an issue on a router that did not like a change in the hashing
done by the host behind it.

Do not ask me for details that I cannot provide, but I would guess it is
better not changing legacy modes unilaterally.


--
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