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  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:   Sat, 12 Dec 2020 12:22:53 +0100
From:   Harald Welte <laforge@...filter.org>
To:     Jonas Bonn <jonas@...rbonn.se>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, pablo@...filter.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 10/12] gtp: add IPv6 support

Hi Jonas,

thanks again for your patches, they are very much appreciated.

However, I don't think that it is "that easy".

PDP contexts (at least) in GPRS/EDGE and UMTS come in three flavors:
* IPv4 only
* IPv6 only
* IPv4v6 (i.e. both an IPv4 and an IPv6 address within the same tunnel)

See for example osmo-ggsn at https://git.osmocom.org/osmo-ggsn
for an userspace implementation that covers all three cases,
as well as a related automatic test suite containing cases
for all three flavors at
https://git.osmocom.org/osmo-ttcn3-hacks/tree/ggsn_tests

If I read your patch correctly

On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:26:10PM +0100, Jonas Bonn wrote:
> -	struct in_addr		ms_addr_ip4;
> -	struct in_addr		peer_addr_ip4;
> +	struct in6_addr		ms_addr;
> +	struct in6_addr		peer_addr;

this simply replaces the (inner) IPv4 "MS addr" with an IPv6 "MS addr".

Sure, it is an improvement over v4-only.  But IMHO any follow-up
change to introduce v4v6 PDP contexts would require significant changes,
basically re-introducing the ms_add_ip4 member which you are removing here.

Therefore, I argue very much in favor of intrducing proper IPv6 support
(including v4v6) in one go.

Regards,
	Harald

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@...monks.org>           http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
                                                  (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists