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]
Date:   Sat, 10 Aug 2019 08:30:47 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <>
To:     David Ahern <>
Cc:     Roopa Prabhu <>,
        netdev <>,
        David Miller <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,
        Stephen Hemminger <>,,
        Michal Kubecek <>,
        Andrew Lunn <>,,
        Saeed Mahameed <>,
        mlxsw <>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next rfc 3/7] net: rtnetlink: add commands to add and
 delete alternative ifnames

Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 06:14:03PM CEST, wrote:
>On 8/9/19 9:40 AM, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>>>> index ce2a623abb75..b36cfd83eb76 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>>>> @@ -164,6 +164,13 @@ enum {
>>>>>         RTM_GETNEXTHOP,
>>>>> +       RTM_NEWALTIFNAME = 108,
>>>>> +       RTM_DELALTIFNAME,
>>>>> +       RTM_GETALTIFNAME,
>>>>> +
>>>> I might have missed the prior discussion, why do we need new commands
>>>> ?. can't this simply be part of RTM_*LINK and we use RTM_SETLINK to
>>>> set alternate names ?
>>> How? This is to add/remove. How do you suggest to to add/remove by
>>> setlink?
>> to that point, I am also not sure why we have a new API For multiple
>> names. I mean why support more than two names  (existing old name and
>> a new name to remove the length limitation) ?
>> Your patch series addresses a very important problem (we run into this
>> limitation all  the time and its hard to explain it to network
>> operators) and
>>  its already unfortunate that we have to have more than one name
>> because we cannot resize the existing one.
>> The best we can do for simpler transition/management from user-space
>> is to keep the api simple..
>> ie keep it close to the management of existing link attributes. Hence
>> the question.
>> I assumed this would be like alias. A single new field that can be
>> referenced in lieu of the old one.
>> Your series is very useful to many of us...but when i think about
>> changing our network manager to accommodate this, I am worried about
>> how many apps will have to change.
>> I agree they have to change regardless but now they will have to
>> listen to yet another notification and msg format for names ?
>> (apologies for joining the thread late and if i missed prior discussion on this)
>I agree with Roopa. I do not understand why new RTM commands are needed.
>The existing IFLA + ifinfomsg struct give more than enough ways to id
>the device for adding / deleting an alternate name.

Could you please write me an example message of add/remove?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists