linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明" <yoshfuji@wide.ad.jp>
To: davem@redhat.com
Cc: latten@austin.ibm.com, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, netdev@oss.sgi.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IPsecv6 integrity failures not dropped
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 11:12:38 +0900 (JST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030419.111238.07385967.yoshfuji@wide.ad.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030418.141014.17269641.davem@redhat.com>

In article <20030418.141014.17269641.davem@redhat.com> (at Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:10:14 -0700 (PDT)), "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> says:

> I think it would be better if ipv6's upper-layer interface worked
> like ipv4's.  ie. a < 0 return value means:
> 
> 	next_proto =- ret;
> 	goto resubmit;

NO!  Please, don't do this again (for now, at least).
This idea is what we had introduced the bug,
that was fixed by "[IPV6]: Fixed multiple mistake extension header handling."

We need to get the offset of the next header, in addition to the value
itself.

inet6_protocol function will return:

  > 0: more header(s) follows; next header is pointed by skb->nh.raw[nhoff]
  = 0: stop parsing on success; increment the statistics (nhoff is undefined)
  < 0: stop parsing on failure (nhoff is undefined)

If upper-layer returns positive value, we continue parsing.
Then, if the skb->nh.raw[nhoff] is unknown, we send back the parameter problem 
message with the offset to the unrecognized next header field.


> The less that is different between ipv4/ipv6 the better.

Agreed, but please note that IPv4 side would be required to be changed
in general.


Well... 

1) May we have a new member to point the offset of the next header in 
   ipv6_pinfo{}?
   Then, we can remove *nhoffp from argument of inet6_protocol function.
   (We will be cleaner handing of HbH option, too.)
2) change IPv4 upperlayer function to take struct sk_buff **.


If you are not in hurry, I'll take care of this.

-- 
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI @ USAGI Project <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
GPG FP: 9022 65EB 1ECF 3AD1 0BDF  80D8 4807 F894 E062 0EEA

  reply	other threads:[~2003-04-19  2:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-04-18 20:17 latten
2003-04-18 21:10 ` David S. Miller
2003-04-19  2:12   ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 [this message]
2003-04-19  2:17     ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2003-04-19  2:50 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2003-04-20  3:35   ` David S. Miller

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=20030419.111238.07385967.yoshfuji@wide.ad.jp \
    --to=yoshfuji@wide.ad.jp \
    --cc=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
    --cc=latten@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    --subject='Re: IPsecv6 integrity failures not dropped' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).