Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread James Morris
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, David Miller wrote: > > One remaining corner case is NFS/IPv6 root, whereby userland won't have > > a chance to start before the network, and hence may miss the solicited > > RA. Or would it? By default, the next unsolicited RA can be anytime > > from now to after 10 minute

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread David Miller
From: Rémi_Denis-Courmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:19:11 +0300 > Le mercredi 11 juillet 2007, David Stevens a écrit : > > That sounds like a good idea to me (FWIW), > > though I also still think a simple raw-socket > > application would do it just fine, possibly with >

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread Vlad Yasevich
Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote: > Le mercredi 11 juillet 2007, David Stevens a écrit : >> That sounds like a good idea to me (FWIW), >> though I also still think a simple raw-socket >> application would do it just fine, possibly with >> no kernel modification at all. >> But since the ker

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread Rémi Denis-Courmont
Le mercredi 11 juillet 2007, David Stevens a écrit : > That sounds like a good idea to me (FWIW), > though I also still think a simple raw-socket > application would do it just fine, possibly with > no kernel modification at all. > But since the kernel wouldn't be maintaining > the

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread David Stevens
> Since you asked for another idea, how about using netlink to send _validated_ RA > information to interested parties? > > -vlad That sounds like a good idea to me (FWIW), though I also still think a simple raw-socket application would do it just fine, possibly with no kernel modificati

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread Vlad Yasevich
Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote: > On Wednesday 11 July 2007 15:29:16 YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote: >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Tue, 10 Jul 2007 > 21:11:17 +0300), Remi Denis-Courmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says: >>> ICMPv6 Router Advertisements may now contain informations that is >>> mostly o

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread David Stevens
I think #2 in your list is the right choice, and that has nothing to do with adding a non-standard option (which I completely agree is a bad idea). It looked like you're just checking if the machine is acting as a router or not and if it comes from a link-local address; is that right? Of course,

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread Rémi Denis-Courmont
On Wednesday 11 July 2007 15:29:16 YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:11:17 +0300), Remi Denis-Courmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says: > > ICMPv6 Router Advertisements may now contain informations that is > > mostly of interest to userland. This cur

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-11 Thread YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:11:17 +0300), Remi Denis-Courmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says: > ICMPv6 Router Advertisements may now contain informations that is > mostly of interest to userland. This currently mostly consists of > recursive DNS server addresses (though one s

[PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets

2007-07-10 Thread Remi Denis-Courmont
ICMPv6 Router Advertisements may now contain informations that is mostly of interest to userland. This currently mostly consists of recursive DNS server addresses (though one should expect other stuff to come). This patch adds a setsockopt to ICMPv6 sockets to only deliver Router Advertisements if