netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@gnu.org>
To: jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>, Marc Boucher <marc@mbsi.ca>
Cc: bert hubert <ahu@ds9a.nl>, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH,RFC] explicit connection confirmation
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:27:58 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021107152758.GB23858@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.30.0211070834130.11358-100000@shell.cyberus.ca>

Hi,

netfilter, yeah, sure, 'could have', but please.

'Make it a netfilter module' is generally what people say when
they are confronted with a feature they don't like.

There was a thread about this in private mail round April this year,
in which some good points were raised.

- From the kernel point of view, doing it in netfilter would require
  more state tracking and access to the socket hashes and would be
  uglier.

- From the application writer's point of view, doing it via a socket
  option is much more intuitive, since this flag is really a socket
  property, than doing it via some extra API which would make it way
  too difficult/complex to use in existing apps.

It's worth noting that selective TCP connection acceptance was
also intended to be implemented as a socket option by the original
BSD developers.  See http://www.kohala.com/start/vanj.94jun27.txt
(link thanks to Marc Boucher).

>From the accept(2) man page on Red Hat Linux (again thanks to Marc
Boucher):

       For  certain  protocols which require an explicit confirmation, such as
       DECNet, accept can be thought of as merely dequeuing the  next  connec-
       tion  request  and  not  implying  confirmation.   Confirmation  can be
       implied by a normal read or write  on  the  new  file  descriptor,  and
       rejection can be implied by closing the new socket. Currently only DEC-
       Net has these semantics on Linux.


cheers,
Lennert



On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 08:36:28AM -0500, jamal wrote:

> Could you not have used netfilter for this? You have the app
> sending controls to add netfilter policies and delete them when not
> needed.
> 
> cheers,
> jamal
> 
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2002-11-07 15:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-11-07  9:32 [PATCH,RFC] explicit connection confirmation Lennert Buytenhek
2002-11-07 11:27 ` bert hubert
2002-11-07 12:09   ` Lennert Buytenhek
2002-11-07 13:36     ` jamal
2002-11-07 15:27       ` Lennert Buytenhek [this message]
2002-11-08 11:22         ` jamal
2002-11-08 11:52           ` bert hubert
2002-11-08 11:56             ` Marc Boucher
2002-11-08 18:28           ` Lennert Buytenhek
2002-11-07 13:49     ` bert hubert
2002-11-07 14:30       ` Lennert Buytenhek
2002-11-07 16:24         ` bert hubert
2003-08-14 13:11 ` Lennert Buytenhek
2003-08-25 11:09   ` Harald Welte

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=20021107152758.GB23858@gnu.org \
    --to=buytenh@gnu.org \
    --cc=ahu@ds9a.nl \
    --cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
    --cc=marc@mbsi.ca \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).