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: <CAJ3xEMhfj87LDtA57m_34awHojKqUzdeL9dTUNwUcjymfzHEWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:16:18 +0200
From:   Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 0/7] net/ipv6: Add support for path selection
 using hash of 5-tuple

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 2:42 PM, Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 01:03:14PM +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 2:05 AM, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> wrote:
>> > Hardware supports multipath selection using the standard L4 5-tuple
>> > instead of just L3 and the flow label. In addition, some network
>> > operators prefer IPv6 path selection to use the 5-tuple.
>>
>> The HW supports using flow label and AFAIK that is the preferred approach
>> by the community (?)
>>
>> > To that end, add support to IPv6 for multipath hash policy
>>
>> so a question comes up if/what are the disadvantaged
>> to support 5-tuple. E.g Tom was commenting that such DPI is problematic
>> when multiple IPv6 header extensions are used.
>
> Tom is much more qualified to answer this, but I think the problem is
> that the flow label isn't always set. Also, apparently some devices
> change the flow label mid flow. See:

OK. But note we have two ends to deal with here (1) generation (2) usage

E.g if the kernel generates flow label but uses source port we have inconsistent
environment. Problem is that the generation and usage typically don't happen
on the same network point.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ