From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "D. Herrendoerfer" Subject: Re: [RFC] bridge: MAC learning uevents Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 19:23:49 +0200 Message-ID: <3E731737-A295-40AD-9F87-1E1A835DEADB@herrendoerfer.name> References: <7824e091-6b1a-bf39-0f78-1c9084d59972@herrendoerfer.name> <87d1ketoc2.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Andi Kleen Return-path: Received: from dd20738.kasserver.com ([85.13.140.210]:38292 "EHLO dd20738.kasserver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752090AbcIHRXw (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Sep 2016 13:23:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87d1ketoc2.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: There is a reference to the virtual port in the event so you can actually keep only one record MAC per port, I suppose the the impact would be the same if you do this to a macvtap device on top of an ethernet device. But granted - you could really load down the host. Dirk On 08 Sep 2016, at 17:15, Andi Kleen wrote: > "D. Herrendoerfer" writes: >> >> I may be missing something here - I'm pretty sure there I am, but is >> there any conceptual >> >> reason why this should not be done this way ? > > What happens if someone floods the network with random mac addresses? > Sounds like an easy way to do a DoS attack against your host? > > -Andi