netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ipv6: put autoconf routes into per-interface tables

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: <37df3b18-d17b-5875-7b44-db40be7b459c@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:   Sat, 7 Jan 2017 21:24:18 -0700
From:   David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     zenczykowski@...il.com, hannes@...essinduktion.org, ek@...gle.com,
        hideaki.yoshifuji@...aclelinux.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        drosen@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ipv6: put autoconf routes into
 per-interface tables

On 1/6/17 8:30 AM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> This patch adds a per-interface sysctl to have the kernel put
> autoconf routes into different tables. This allows each interface
> to have its own routing table if desired.  Choosing the default
> interface, or using different interfaces at the same time on a
> per-socket or per-packet basis) can be done using policy routing
> mechanisms that use as SO_BINDTODEVICE / IPV6_PKTINFO, mark-based
> routing, or UID-based routing to select specific routing tables.

Why not use the VRF capability then? create a VRF and assign the interface to it. End result is the same -- separate tables and the need to use a bind-to-device API to hit those routes.