netdev - Re: [PATCH ipsec,v2] xfrm: interface: fix ipv4 pmtu check to honor ip header df

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: <YDUbYvCnRN/aBQrM@hog>
Date:   Tue, 23 Feb 2021 16:12:34 +0100
From:   Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>
To:     Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>
Cc:     steffen.klassert@...unet.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
        davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec,v2] xfrm: interface: fix ipv4 pmtu check to honor
 ip header df

2021-02-20, 15:01:15 +0200, Eyal Birger wrote:
> Frag needed should only be sent if the header enables DF.
> 
> This fix allows packets larger than MTU to pass the xfrm interface
> and be fragmented after encapsulation, aligning behavior with
> non-interface xfrm.
> 
> Fixes: f203b76d7809 ("xfrm: Add virtual xfrm interfaces")
> Signed-off-by: Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>
> 
> -----
> 
> v2: better align coding with ip_vti

LGTM. We also need to do the same thing in ip_vti and ip6_vti. Do you
want to take care of it, or should I?

Either way, for this patch:
Reviewed-by: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>

-- 
Sabrina