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: <CAHmME9oTU7HwP5=qo=aFWe0YXv5EPGoREpF2k-QY7qTmkDeXEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 17 Nov 2015 03:41:35 +0100
From:	"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>,
	Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.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

Hi Eric,

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> There is very little chance we'll accept a new member in sk_buff, unless
> proven needed.

I actually have no intention of doing this! I'm wondering if there
already is a member in sk_buff that moonlights as my desired ttl
counter, or if there's another mechanism for avoiding routing loops. I
want to work with what's already there, rather than meddling with the
innards of important and memory sensitive structures such as sk_buff.
--
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