netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv4: properly apply change to ignore_routes_on

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]

Date:	Wed, 2 Mar 2016 13:46:32 -0500
From:	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv4: properly apply change to
 ignore_routes_on_linkdown to all interfaces

On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:36:18AM -0800, David Ahern wrote:
> On 3/2/16 10:28 AM, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
> >>This seems wrong -- changing the 'all' and 'default' settings for a sysctl
> >>>should not require walking the interface list.
> >Not if you want to actually apply the config to all the interfaces.  If
> >you notice this borrows heavily from the sysctl to control ipv4
> >forwarding as it behaves in a manner that I would consider to be
> >proper.
> >
> 
> When the config is checked runtime it can look at 'all' and the setting for
> the individual interface; you don't have to walk the devices and apply the
> setting each time it is changed. See the keep_addr_on_down implementation.

Yes, I've seen that implemenation.  My interest was making sure that the
reported interface sysctl value was what was used AND it seems cleaner
to leave the ipv4 fib checks as-is since an additional clause in many of
those statements will make them even harder to read.  :-)