From: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net>
To: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
Cc: Antony Antony <antony@phenome.org>,
Antony Antony <antony.antony@secunet.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, devel@linux-ipsec.org,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [devel-ipsec] [PATCH ipsec-next v6] xfrm: Add Direction to the SA in or out
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 09:26:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZhY_O_6w1Yz_R6aS@hog> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <658b4081-bc8a-4958-ae62-7d805fcacdcd@6wind.com>
2024-04-10, 08:27:49 +0200, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Le 08/04/2024 à 15:02, Sabrina Dubroca a écrit :
> [snip]
> > Nicolas, since you were objecting to the informational nature of the
> > attribute in v5: would you still object to the new attribute (and not
> > just limited to offload cases) if it properly restricted attributes
> > that don't match the direction?
> It's a good step, sure. Does this prevent an 'input' SA to be used in the output
> path? This is the case I'm objecting.
Not in the latest version, what we were discussing here was only
checking attributes that don't match the direction of the SA.
Adding checks on the input and output patch to only look up and use
SAs with the correct direction (or no direction set) should be doable,
and probably has a negligible impact on performance. If we do this, we
should maybe add a counter for direction mismatch
(Xfrm{In,Out}StateDirMismatch?) to help admins.
I agree that it would make more sense.
--
Sabrina
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-10 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-05 12:40 [PATCH ipsec-next v6] xfrm: Add Direction to the SA in or out Antony Antony
2024-04-05 13:31 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2024-04-05 21:56 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2024-04-06 12:36 ` [devel-ipsec] " Christian Hopps
2024-04-07 8:23 ` Antony Antony
2024-04-08 13:02 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2024-04-09 17:23 ` Antony Antony
2024-04-10 8:56 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2024-04-10 16:59 ` Antony Antony
2024-04-10 21:41 ` Christian Hopps
2024-04-11 0:58 ` Paul Wouters
2024-04-11 9:23 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2024-04-11 11:03 ` Steffen Klassert
2024-04-11 9:24 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2024-04-11 10:36 ` Antony Antony
2024-04-11 20:14 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2024-04-11 10:57 ` Steffen Klassert
2024-04-10 6:27 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2024-04-10 7:26 ` Sabrina Dubroca [this message]
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=ZhY_O_6w1Yz_R6aS@hog \
--to=sd@queasysnail.net \
--cc=antony.antony@secunet.com \
--cc=antony@phenome.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=devel@linux-ipsec.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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).