netdev - Re: [net-next RFC 0/4] SO

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56F5BBB3.4010706@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 Mar 2016 22:29:07 +0000
From:	Gilberto <gilberto.bertin@...il.com>
To:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next RFC 0/4] SO_BINDTOSUBNET

On 03/25/2016 12:25 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Gilberto Bertin
> <gilberto.bertin@...il.com> wrote:
>> This is my second attempt to submit an RFC for this patch.
>>
>> Some arguments for and against it since the first submission:
>> * SO_BINDTOSUBNET is an arbitrary option and can be seens as nother use
>> * case of the SO_REUSEPORT BPF patch
>> * but at the same time using BPF requires more work/code on the server
>>   and since the bind to subnet use case could potentially become a
>>   common one maybe there is some value in having it as an option instead
>>   of having to code (either manually or with clang) an eBPF program that
>>   would do the same
> 
> Gilberto, I'm not sure I understand this argument. Have you
> implemented the BPF bind solution?
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom

Yes, I wrote up a very basic draft for this feature (I didn't know there
was already some work going on with SO_ATTACH_REUSEPORT_[CE]BPF).

Thanks,
Gilberto