[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200129181550.GH18684@gauss3.secunet.de>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:15:50 +0100
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: <thomas.egerer@...unet.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] xfrm: Interpret XFRM_INF as 32 bit value for non-ESN
states
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 10:54:23AM +0100, David Miller wrote:
> From: Thomas Egerer <thomas.egerer@...unet.com>
> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 15:31:14 +0100
>
> > Currently, when left unconfigured, hard and soft packet limit are set to
> > XFRM_INF ((__u64)~0). This can be problematic for non-ESN states, as
> > their 'natural' packet limit is 2^32 - 1 packets. When reached, instead
> > of creating an expire event, the states become unusable and increase
> > their respective 'state expired' counter in the xfrm statistics. The
> > only way for them to actually expire is based on their lifetime limits.
> >
> > This patch reduces the packet limit of non-ESN states with XFRM_INF as
> > their soft/hard packet limit to their maximum achievable sequence
> > number in order to trigger an expire, which can then be used by an IKE
> > daemon to reestablish the connection.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Egerer <thomas.egerer@...unet.com>
>
> Please always CC: the ipsec maintainers for patches to IPSEC.
>
> Steffen, I assume I will get this from you.
Yes, I have it already in my queue.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists