From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/10] af_unix: add multicast and filtering features to
 AF_UNIX
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 15:28:46 +0100
Message-ID: <20120228142846.GD187520@jupiter.n2.diac24.net>
References: <1329753455-1106-1-git-send-email-javier@collabora.co.uk>
 <20120224.153616.117399887784547022.davem@davemloft.net>
 <4F4B8C66.5060206@collabora.co.uk>
 <20120227.140535.1623396420455657443.davem@davemloft.net>
 <1330426059.2139.21.camel@megeve>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	javier.martinez@collabora.co.uk, javier@collabora.co.uk,
	eric.dumazet@gmail.com, lennart@poettering.net,
	kay.sievers@vrfy.org, alban.crequy@collabora.co.uk,
	bart.cerneels@collabora.co.uk, sjoerd.simons@collabora.co.uk,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo.moya@collabora.co.uk>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1330426059.2139.21.camel@megeve>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:47:39AM +0100, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > - slow readers: dropping packets vs blocking the sender. Although
> >   datagrams are not reliable on IP, datagrams on Unix sockets are
> never
> >   lost. So if one receiver has its buffer full the sender is blocked
> > instead of dropping packets. That way we guarantee a reliable
> > communication channel.

This sounds like a terribly nice way to f*ck the entire D-Bus system by
having one broken (or malicious) desktop application. What's the
intended way of coping with users that block the socket by not reading?


-David L.