netdev - Re: [DKIM] Re: [devel-ipsec] [RFC ipsec-next v2 0/8] Add IP-TFS mode to xfrm

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: <m2wmucyyap.fsf@ja.int.chopps.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 15:14:15 -0500
From: Christian Hopps <chopps@...n.net>
To: Antony Antony <antony@...nome.org>
Cc: Christian Hopps <chopps@...n.net>, Andrew Cagney
 <andrew.cagney@...il.com>, devel@...ux-ipsec.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Subject: Re: [DKIM] Re: [devel-ipsec] [RFC ipsec-next v2 0/8] Add IP-TFS
 mode to xfrm


Antony Antony <antony@...nome.org> writes:

> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 01:39:50PM -0500, Christian Hopps via Devel wrote:
>>
>> Andrew Cagney <andrew.cagney@...il.com> writes:
>>
>> > > I did a multiple days peer review with Chris on this pachset. So my
>> > > concerns are already addressed.
>> > >
>> > > Further reviews are welcome! This is a bigger change and it would
>> > > be nice if more people could look at it.
>> >
>> > I have a usability question.  What name should appear when a user
>> > interacts with and sees log messages from this feature?
>> >     ip-tfs, IP-TFS, IP_TFS
>> > or:
>> >    iptfs, IPTFS, ...
>>
>> I think no `-` or `_` in the code/api. For documentation it is probably better to hew closer to the RFC and use `IP-TFS`.
>
> That sounds good. However,
> iproute2 output, ip xfrm state, or "ip xfrm policy" is that documentation or code?
>
> current unsubmitted patch shows: "iptfs"

That's code/api. I was thinking ui/api when I said api.

Documentation would be something ending in a .rst or within a comment as that might be referring to the RFC too.

I will go through and make sure things are consistent in the next version.

Thanks,
Chris.

>
> src 192.1.2.23 dst 192.1.2.45
> 	proto esp spi 0x76ee6b87(1995336583) reqid 16389(0x00004005) mode iptfs
>
> root@...t:/testing/pluto/ikev2-74-iptfs-01 (iptfs-aa-20231120)# ip  x p
> src 192.0.1.0/24 dst 192.0.2.0/24
> 	dir out priority 1757393 ptype main
> 	tmpl src 192.1.2.45 dst 192.1.2.23
> 		proto esp reqid 16389 mode iptfs
>
> -antony


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (859 bytes)