netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/3] rds: Changing IP address internal representation to struct in6

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: <20180706152558.GJ30983@oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 6 Jul 2018 11:25:58 -0400
From:   Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
To:     Ka-Cheong Poon <ka-cheong.poon@...cle.com>
Cc:     Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
        davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        rds-devel@....oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/3] rds: Changing IP address internal
 representation to struct in6_addr

On (07/06/18 23:08), Ka-Cheong Poon wrote:
> 
> As mentioned in a previous mail, it is unclear why the
> port number is transport specific.  Most Internet services
> use the same port number running over TCP/UDP as shown
> in the IANA database.  And the IANA RDS registration is
> the same.  What is the rationale of having a transport
> specific number in the RDS implementation?

because not every transport may need a port number.

e.g., "RDS over pigeon carrier" may not need a port number.

in a different design (e.g., KCM) the listen port is configurable
with sysctl

Some may need more than one, e.g., rds_rdma, evidently.

What is the problem with using the unused 18635 for the RDS_CM_PORT?