archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明" <>
Subject: Re: IPsecv6 integrity failures not dropped
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 11:12:38 +0900 (JST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

In article <> (at Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:10:14 -0700 (PDT)), "David S. Miller" <> 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

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.


1) May we have a new member to point the offset of the next header in 
   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 <>
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:

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

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: IPsecv6 integrity failures not dropped' \

* 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).