From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zombie.ncsc.mil (zombie.ncsc.mil [144.51.88.131]) by tarius.tycho.ncsc.mil (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m3B0dkUR013211 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:39:46 -0400 Received: from g4t0017.houston.hp.com (jazzdrum.ncsc.mil [144.51.5.7]) by zombie.ncsc.mil (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id m3B0djCJ020525 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:39:45 GMT From: Paul Moore To: James Morris Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Labeled networking patches for 2.6.26 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 18:12:36 -0400 Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov References: <20080409204936.26774.55254.stgit@flek.lan> <200804101725.59604.paul.moore@hp.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200804101812.36542.paul.moore@hp.com> Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov On Thursday 10 April 2008 6:04:32 pm James Morris wrote: > On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Paul Moore wrote: > > Just a quick follow-up on testing, I've run this for a few hours on > > two Fedora systems with both labeled and unlabeled IPsec in use > > with SAs rekeying every 5 minutes and didn't notice anything evil. > > > > At this point I'd strip the "RFC" from the patchset and ask that > > they be considered for inclusion in 2.6.26 assuming there are no > > objections. > > I suggest pushing them via DaveM's tree, unless they depend on > anything in my tree. Okay. It sounds like DaveM is working through a backlog right now, if I don't see them in his tree by next week I'll resubmit them. Thanks. -- paul moore linux @ hp -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Moore Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Labeled networking patches for 2.6.26 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 18:12:36 -0400 Message-ID: <200804101812.36542.paul.moore@hp.com> References: <20080409204936.26774.55254.stgit@flek.lan> <200804101725.59604.paul.moore@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov To: James Morris Return-path: Received: from g4t0017.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.20]:43620 "EHLO g4t0017.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756168AbYDJWMv (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2008 18:12:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 10 April 2008 6:04:32 pm James Morris wrote: > On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Paul Moore wrote: > > Just a quick follow-up on testing, I've run this for a few hours on > > two Fedora systems with both labeled and unlabeled IPsec in use > > with SAs rekeying every 5 minutes and didn't notice anything evil. > > > > At this point I'd strip the "RFC" from the patchset and ask that > > they be considered for inclusion in 2.6.26 assuming there are no > > objections. > > I suggest pushing them via DaveM's tree, unless they depend on > anything in my tree. Okay. It sounds like DaveM is working through a backlog right now, if I don't see them in his tree by next week I'll resubmit them. Thanks. -- paul moore linux @ hp