netdev - Re: [PATCH next] net: add option to not create fall-back tunnels in root-ns as well

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 21 Aug 2020 21:18:01 -0700
From:   Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) 
        <maheshb@...gle.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>,
        linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, kuba@...nel.org,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, mahesh@...dewar.net,
        Jian Yang <jianyang@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH next] net: add option to not create fall-back tunnels in
 root-ns as well

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 2:35 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 14:25:20 -0700
>
> > If no kernel command line option is specified, should the default
> > be to maintain compatibility, or do you think it's okay to make
> > the default be no extra interfaces?  They can AFAICT always be added
> > manually via 'ip link add' netlink commands.
>
> You can't change current default behavior, so the answer should be
> obvious right?
Yes, I don't want to change the default behavior that's why I kept the
default value = 0, but yes this config-option would force one to
rebuild the kernel.

OK, I'll respin it with kcmdline option instead of config option
maintaining the default behavior. thanks.