[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANrj0baVKJJ4vzjFXs1S1rn4BUo4qvXFCHWDY2r0eKUp3qd9Bg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:29:02 -0800
From: Benedict Wong <benedictwong@...gle.com>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Nathan Harold <nharold@...gle.com>,
Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>,
Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec, resend 0/1] xfrm: set-mark default behavior changes
(Resend as plaintext. Forgot to check gmail plain-text setting)
> There was no need to resend this without changes. I still had this
> patchset in my queue.
Ahh, my apologies. I will keep that in mind for next time.
> I'm ok with the change, but you did not Cc
> all the authors of the patch you want to fix. So please resend once
> again with Cc to all the authors, so that they have a chance to
> review this change.
Can do. I'll resend with all of the people listed in the co-developed
commit lines of 9b42c1f179a6
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 2:02 AM Steffen Klassert
<steffen.klassert@...unet.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:14:11PM -0800, Benedict Wong wrote:
> > A behavior change introduced in 9b42c1f179a6 (“xfrm: Extend the
> > output_mark to support input direction and masking”) results in a
> > change in:
> >
> > 1. Default outbound behavior with regards to route lookup marks, and
> > 2. Inbound behavior for SAs used to decapsulate packets when the output
> > mark (as specified in 4.14 to 4.18) is set.
> >
> > This patch set restores the previous default outbound behavior,
> > resolving (1), but behavior change (2) will require more discussion.
> >
> > Specifically, in (2), a SA with a "output mark" set will now have that
> > Mark imposed on the inbound packet (As opposed to the previous
> > output-mark behavior where the inbound packet's mark would not be
> > touched). This is less of a concern, as it is limited to the case where:
> >
> > 1. SA output mark is set
> > 2. SA is using non-transport mode
> > 3. SA is configured for inbound decapsulation (local dst IP)
> >
> > Critically, conditions 1 and 3 imply a configuration that output mark
> > was not designed to support. The only valid use case for this seems
> > to be the loopback case (as IP addresses would apply bidirectionally).
> > As such, we believe that this behavioral change is acceptable as is.
>
> There was no need to resend this without changes. I still had this
> patchset in my queue. I'm ok with the change, but you did not Cc
> all the authors of the patch you want to fix. So please resend once
> again with Cc to all the authors, so that they have a chance to
> review this change.
>
> Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists