netdev - Re: TCP using IPv4-mapped IPv6 address as source

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0d48793d-81f1-3666-5c47-9c2431198dc1@udel.edu>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jan 2017 16:26:04 -0500
From:   "Jonathan T. Leighton" <jtleight@...l.edu>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
        Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: TCP using IPv4-mapped IPv6 address as source



On 1/11/17 3:43 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 14:59 -0500, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
>
>> I think the RFC states somewhere that you should never ever
>> send out a v4 mapped address on the wire.
> Can you point the exact RFC ?
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2765  seems to allow just that.

Link was in my original post. See table 20:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6890#page-14

> Jonathan issue is about terminating such flows in TCP stack, which is
> likely not needed/useful.

I'm sure I understand what you're saying here. There should be no flow 
to terminate.

>
>
>
>