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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAG88wWYA72sij4iaWowLpawzM7tJdYdHCKQnE0bjndGO74vROw@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 12:36:32 -0800 From: David Decotigny <ddecotig@...gle.com> To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) <maheshb@...gle.com>, David Decotigny <decot+git@...gle.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>, "Denis V. Lunev" <den@...nvz.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@...wei.com>, Yuwei Wang <wangyuweihx@...il.com>, Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander.mikhalitsyn@...tuozzo.com>, Thomas Zeitlhofer <thomas.zeitlhofer+lkml@...it.at> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] net: neigh: persist proxy config across link flaps (answer below) On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 11:05 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 22:18:04 -0800 David Decotigny wrote: > > I don't think this patch is changing that part of the behavior: we still > > flush the cached nd entries when the link flaps. What we don't remove are > > the pneigh_entry-es (ip neigh add proxy ...) attached to the device where > > the link flaps: those are configured once and this patch ensures that they > > survive the link flaps as long as the netdev stays admin-up. When > > the netdev is brought admin-down, we keep the behavior we had before the > > patch. > > Makes sense. This is not urgent, tho, right? Not that kind of urgent. FTR, in the v2 you suggested to use NUD_PERMANENT, I can try to see how this would look like. Note that this will make the patch larger and more intrusive, and with potentially a behavior change for whoever uses the netlink API directly instead of the iproute2 implementation for ip neigh X proxy things. > > David A, do you agree and should we treat this as a fix with > > Fixes: 859bd2ef1fc1 ("net: Evict neighbor entries on carrier down") Thanks. > > added? > > Reminder: please bottom post on the list
Powered by blists - more mailing lists