netdev - Re: [RFC v3 3/3] vxlan: handle underlay VRF changes

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: <c56b5c57-98c7-865a-8089-d0017ad3a625@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Nov 2018 10:09:32 -0700
From:   David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     Alexis Bauvin <abauvin@...leway.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, akherbouche@...leway.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 3/3] vxlan: handle underlay VRF changes

On 11/20/18 9:58 AM, Alexis Bauvin wrote:
> A socket bound to vrf-blue listens on *:4789, thus owning the port. If moving an
> underlay to the default vrf (ip link set dummy-b nomaster), a new socket will be
> created, unbound to any interface and listening on *:4789. However, because it
> will be in the default vrf, it will try to take ownership of port 4789 on ALL
> vrfs, and fail because this port is already owned in vrf-blue for vxlan-a.

SO_REUSEPORT will fix that and incoming traffic through a vrf and
default (non-)vrf will work. The recent changes by Vyatta provide even
better isolation of default vrf and overlapping ports.