All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
	network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 3/5] sctp: add SCTP_EXPOSE_POTENTIALLY_FAILED_STATE sockopt
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:15:08 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191009161508.GB25555@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADvbK_cFCuHAwxGAdY0BevrrAd6pQRP2tW_ej9mM3G4Aog3qpg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:28:32PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:02 PM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Xin Long
> > > Sent: 08 October 2019 12:25
> > >
> > > This is a sockopt defined in section 7.3 of rfc7829: "Exposing
> > > the Potentially Failed Path State", by which users can change
> > > pf_expose per sock and asoc.
> >
> > If I read these patches correctly the default for this sockopt in 'enabled'.
> > Doesn't this mean that old application binaries will receive notifications
> > that they aren't expecting?
> >
> > I'd have thought that applications would be required to enable it.
> If we do that, sctp_getsockopt_peer_addr_info() in patch 2/5 breaks.
> 
I don't think we can safely do either of these things.  Older
applications still need to behave as they did prior to the introduction
of this notification, and we shouldn't allow unexpected notifications to
be sent.

What if you added a check in get_peer_addr_info to only return -EACCESS
if pf_expose is 0 and the application isn't subscribed to the PF event?

Neil

> >
> >         David
> >
> > -
> > Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> > Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
> >
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
	network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 3/5] sctp: add SCTP_EXPOSE_POTENTIALLY_FAILED_STATE sockopt
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 16:15:08 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191009161508.GB25555@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADvbK_cFCuHAwxGAdY0BevrrAd6pQRP2tW_ej9mM3G4Aog3qpg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:28:32PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:02 PM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Xin Long
> > > Sent: 08 October 2019 12:25
> > >
> > > This is a sockopt defined in section 7.3 of rfc7829: "Exposing
> > > the Potentially Failed Path State", by which users can change
> > > pf_expose per sock and asoc.
> >
> > If I read these patches correctly the default for this sockopt in 'enabled'.
> > Doesn't this mean that old application binaries will receive notifications
> > that they aren't expecting?
> >
> > I'd have thought that applications would be required to enable it.
> If we do that, sctp_getsockopt_peer_addr_info() in patch 2/5 breaks.
> 
I don't think we can safely do either of these things.  Older
applications still need to behave as they did prior to the introduction
of this notification, and we shouldn't allow unexpected notifications to
be sent.

What if you added a check in get_peer_addr_info to only return -EACCESS
if pf_expose is 0 and the application isn't subscribed to the PF event?

Neil

> >
> >         David
> >
> > -
> > Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> > Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
> >
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-09 16:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-08 11:25 [PATCHv2 net-next 0/5] sctp: update from rfc7829 Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25 ` Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25 ` [PATCHv2 net-next 1/5] sctp: add SCTP_ADDR_POTENTIALLY_FAILED notification Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25   ` Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25   ` [PATCHv2 net-next 2/5] sctp: add pf_expose per netns and sock and asoc Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25     ` Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25     ` [PATCHv2 net-next 3/5] sctp: add SCTP_EXPOSE_POTENTIALLY_FAILED_STATE sockopt Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25       ` Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25       ` [PATCHv2 net-next 4/5] sctp: add support for Primary Path Switchover Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25         ` Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25         ` [PATCHv2 net-next 5/5] sctp: add SCTP_PEER_ADDR_THLDS_V2 sockopt Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:25           ` Xin Long
2019-10-08 13:02       ` [PATCHv2 net-next 3/5] sctp: add SCTP_EXPOSE_POTENTIALLY_FAILED_STATE sockopt David Laight
2019-10-08 13:02         ` David Laight
2019-10-08 15:28         ` Xin Long
2019-10-08 15:28           ` Xin Long
2019-10-09 16:15           ` Neil Horman [this message]
2019-10-09 16:15             ` Neil Horman
2019-10-10  9:28             ` Xin Long
2019-10-10  9:28               ` Xin Long
2019-10-10 12:40               ` Neil Horman
2019-10-10 12:40                 ` Neil Horman
2019-10-11 15:57                 ` Xin Long
2019-10-11 15:57                   ` Xin Long
2019-10-11 16:25                   ` Xin Long
2019-10-11 16:25                     ` Xin Long
2019-10-11 21:29                     ` Neil Horman
2019-10-11 21:29                       ` Neil Horman
2019-10-14  8:36             ` Xin Long
2019-10-14  8:36               ` Xin Long
2019-10-14  8:49               ` David Laight
2019-10-14  8:49                 ` David Laight
2019-10-14 12:41               ` Neil Horman
2019-10-14 12:41                 ` Neil Horman
2019-10-14 13:48                 ` David Laight
2019-10-18 15:34     ` [PATCHv2 net-next 2/5] sctp: add pf_expose per netns and sock and asoc David Laight
2019-10-18 15:34       ` David Laight
2019-10-19  8:45       ` Xin Long
2019-10-19  8:45         ` Xin Long
2019-10-22 11:29         ` David Laight
2019-10-22 11:29           ` David Laight

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191009161508.GB25555@hmswarspite.think-freely.org \
    --to=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lucien.xin@gmail.com \
    --cc=marcelo.leitner@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.