Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <31b9320ccad0df9119cd9a14dbc8a4ad53e5a255.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] netfilter: nf_tables: fib: Drop IPV6 packages if
 IPv6 is disabled on boot
From:   Leonardo Bras <leonardo@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Cc:     Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        coreteam@netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@netfilter.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Wed, 21 Aug 2019 11:14:31 -0300
In-Reply-To: <20190821095844.me6kscvnfruinseu@salvia>
References: <20190820005821.2644-1-leonardo@linux.ibm.com>
         <20190820053607.GL2588@breakpoint.cc>
         <793ce2e9b6200a033d44716749acc837aaf5e4e7.camel@linux.ibm.com>
         <20190821095844.me6kscvnfruinseu@salvia>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256";
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-bdwFVMrF2Fdp/po9EBbe"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5 (3.30.5-1.fc29) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


--=-bdwFVMrF2Fdp/po9EBbe
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 2019-08-21 at 11:58 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 01:15:58PM -0300, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> > On Tue, 2019-08-20 at 07:36 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > Wouldn't fib_netdev.c have the same problem?
> > Probably, but I haven't hit this issue yet.
> >=20
> > > If so, might be better to place this test in both
> > > nft_fib6_eval_type and nft_fib6_eval.
> >=20
> > I think that is possible, and not very hard to do.
> >=20
> > But in my humble viewpoint, it looks like it's nft_fib_inet_eval() and
> > nft_fib_netdev_eval() have the responsibility to choose a valid
> > protocol or drop the package.=20
> > I am not sure if it would be a good move to transfer this
> > responsibility to nft_fib6_eval_type() and nft_fib6_eval(), so I would
> > rather add the same test to nft_fib_netdev_eval().
> >=20
> > Does it make sense?
>=20
> Please, update common code to netdev and ip6 extensions as Florian
> suggests.
>=20
> Thanks.

Ok then, I will send a v2 with that change.

Thanks,

--=-bdwFVMrF2Fdp/po9EBbe
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=Jo9A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-bdwFVMrF2Fdp/po9EBbe--