netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 0/6] ipsec: add TCP encapsulation support (RFC 8229)

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: <20191112.122301.947461264517400659.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:23:01 -0800 (PST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     sd@...asysnail.net
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
        steffen.klassert@...unet.com, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 0/6] ipsec: add TCP encapsulation support
 (RFC 8229)

From: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:18:37 +0100

> This patchset introduces support for TCP encapsulation of IKE and ESP
> messages, as defined by RFC 8229 [0]. It is an evolution of what
> Herbert Xu proposed in January 2018 [1] that addresses the main
> criticism against it, by not interfering with the TCP implementation
> at all. The networking stack now has infrastructure for this: TCP ULPs
> and Stream Parsers.
> 
> The first patches are preparation and refactoring, and the final patch
> adds the feature.
> 
> The main omission in this submission is IPv6 support. ESP
> encapsulation over UDP with IPv6 is currently not supported in the
> kernel either, as UDP encapsulation is aimed at NAT traversal, and NAT
> is not frequently used with IPv6.
> 
> Some of the code is taken directly, or slightly modified, from Herbert
> Xu's original submission [1]. The ULP and strparser pieces are
> new. This work was presented and discussed at the IPsec workshop and
> netdev 0x13 conference [2] in Prague, last March.
> 
> [0] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8229
> [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/859107/
> [2] https://netdevconf.org/0x13/session.html?talk-ipsec-encap
 ...

This looks generally fine to me, and I assume Steffen will pick this up
and integrate it into his ipsec-next tree.

For the series:

Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>