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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 17:22:47 +0200 From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com> To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> Cc: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, emersonbernier@...anota.com, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, piraty1@...ox.ru Subject: Re: 5.1 `ip route get addr/cidr` regression On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 5:21 PM David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> wrote: > > On 5/17/19 8:17 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote: > > AFAIK the purpose of 'ip route get' always was to let the user check > > the result of a route lookup, i.e. "what route would be used if I sent > > a packet to an address". To be honest I would have to check how exactly > > was "ip route get <addr>/<prefixlen>" implemented before. > > > > The prefixlen was always silently ignored. We are trying to clean up > this 'silent ignoring' just hitting a few speed bumps. Indeed what we were after has always been, `ip route show dev <dev> match <addr>/<prefixlen>`, and the old positive return value from `ip route get` wasn't always correct for what we were using it for. So mostly the breakage exposed another bug here.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists