netdev - Re: [patch net-next rfc 3/7] net: rtnetlink: add commands to add and delete alternative ifnames

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 12 Aug 2019 10:01:59 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>, dcbw@...hat.com,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, parav@...lanox.com,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        mlxsw <mlxsw@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next rfc 3/7] net: rtnetlink: add commands to add and
 delete alternative ifnames

On 8/12/19 2:31 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 03:37:26AM CEST, dsahern@...il.com wrote:
>> On 8/11/19 7:34 PM, David Ahern wrote:
>>> On 8/10/19 12:30 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>> Could you please write me an example message of add/remove?
>>>
>>> altnames are for existing netdevs, yes? existing netdevs have an id and
>>> a name - 2 existing references for identifying the existing netdev for
>>> which an altname will be added. Even using the altname as the main
>>> 'handle' for a setlink change, I see no reason why the GETLINK api can
>>> not take an the IFLA_ALT_IFNAME and return the full details of the
>>> device if the altname is unique.
>>>
>>> So, what do the new RTM commands give you that you can not do with
>>> RTM_*LINK?
>>>
>>
>>
>> To put this another way, the ALT_NAME is an attribute of an object - a
>> LINK. It is *not* a separate object which requires its own set of
>> commands for manipulating.
> 
> Okay, again, could you provide example of a message to add/remove
> altname using existing setlink message? Thanks!
> 

Examples from your cover letter with updates

$ ip link set dummy0 altname someothername
$ ip link set dummy0 altname someotherveryveryveryverylongname

$ ip link set dummy0 del altname someothername
$ ip link set dummy0 del altname someotherveryveryveryverylongname

This syntactic sugar to what is really happening:

RTM_NEWLINK, dummy0, IFLA_ALT_IFNAME

if you are allowing many alt names, then yes, you need a flag to say
delete this specific one which is covered by Roopa's nested suggestion.