netdev - Re: Routing loops & TTL tracking with tunnel devices

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: <20151116205950.GB27178@oracle.com>
Date:	Mon, 16 Nov 2015 15:59:50 -0500
From:	Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
To:	"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:	Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.com>, therbert@...gle.com,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Routing loops & TTL tracking with tunnel devices

> Neat. Though, in my case, I'm not actually just prepending a header.
> I'm doing some more substantial transformations of a packet. And this
> needs to work with v4 too. So I'm not sure implementing a v6 spec will

Understood, that spec was just referenced to indicate that there
are more issues (mtu reduction etc) with nested encapsulation,
and this is actually applicable even without the recursion issue
(i.e even if you dont have a tunnelling loop, and even if it
is not ipv6, there are some non-trivial problems here. Luckily,
nested encaps is somewhat uncommon).

--Sowmini


--
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