On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Venkat Yekkirala wrote: > > What we need is a design rationale, some kind of detailed discussion of what > > the user requirements are and what the plan is for implementing features to > > meet these requirements. > > The following is not extensive in a formal/theoretical sense, but hopefully > addresses the need here.
This is great, thanks. Exactly what was needed and much appreciated. I think the interaction with secmark as you describe sounds good. > 3. Patch for ITEM5 has already been done by Eric Paris and is being considered > for upstreaming. This is in Linus' tree now. > 5. Patch for ITEM7: TCS currently have no plans to design and implement this. > (Datagram labeling) I guess we'd probably use SCM_SECURITY for this (similar to IP_CMSG_PASSEC for receiving the label). Is this enough support for user API support at the kernel level in terms of setting and getting labels? - James -- James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
