netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V3] net: Variable SLAAC: SLAAC with prefixes of arbitrary length in PIO

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]

Date:   Fri, 13 Nov 2020 01:55:08 +0900
From:   Hideaki Yoshifuji <hideaki.yoshifuji@...aclelinux.com>
To:     Dmytro Shytyi <dmytro@...tyi.net>
Cc:     kuba <kuba@...nel.org>, kuznet <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        yoshfuji <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        liuhangbin <liuhangbin@...il.com>, davem <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hideaki Yoshifuji <hideaki.yoshifuji@...aclelinux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V3] net: Variable SLAAC: SLAAC with prefixes of
 arbitrary length in PIO

Hi,

2020年11月13日(金) 0:46 Dmytro Shytyi <dmytro@...tyi.net>:
>
> Variable SLAAC: SLAAC with prefixes of arbitrary length in PIO (randomly
> generated hostID or stable privacy + privacy extensions).
> The main problem is that SLAAC RA or PD allocates a /64 by the Wireless
> carrier 4G, 5G to a mobile hotspot, however segmentation of the /64 via
> SLAAC is required so that downstream interfaces can be further subnetted.
> Example: uCPE device (4G + WI-FI enabled) receives /64 via Wireless, and
> assigns /72 to VNF-Firewall, /72 to WIFI, /72 to VNF-Router, /72 to
> Load-Balancer and /72 to wired connected devices.
> IETF document that defines problem statement:
> draft-mishra-v6ops-variable-slaac-problem-stmt
> IETF document that specifies variable slaac:
> draft-mishra-6man-variable-slaac
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmytro Shytyi <dmytro@...tyi.net>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> ---

> -       write_lock_bh(&idev->lock);
> +       int ret;
> +#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128)
> +       __int128 host_id;
> +       __int128 net_prfx;
:

No, this does not help anything.
Please do not rely on __int128.

--yoshfuji