On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 10:29 AM Leonard Crestez cdleonard@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/26/22 10:27, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 9:06 AM Eric Dumazet edumazet@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 8:16 AM Leonard Crestez cdleonard@gmail.com wrote:
Tests are mostly copied from tcp_md5 with minor changes.
It covers VRF support but only based on binding multiple servers: not multiple keys bound to different interfaces.
Also add a specific -t tcp_authopt to run only these tests specifically.
Thanks for the test.
Could you amend the existing TCP MD5 test to make sure dual sockets mode is working ?
Apparently, if we have a dual stack listener socket (AF_INET6), correct incoming IPV4 SYNs are dropped.
If this is the case, fixing MD5 should happen first ;
I remember looking into this and my conclusion was that ipv4-mapped-ipv6 is not worth supporting for AO, at least not in the initial version.
Instead I just wrote a test to check that ipv4-mapped-ipv6 fails for AO: https://github.com/cdleonard/tcp-authopt-test/blob/main/tcp_authopt_test/tes...
On a closer look it does appear that support existed for ipv4-mapped-ipv6 in TCP-MD5 but my test didn't actually exercise it correctly so the test had to be fixed.
Do you think it makes sense to add support for ipv4-mapped-ipv6 for AO? It's not particularly difficult to test, it was skipped due to a lack of application use case and to keep the initial series smaller.
I think this makes sense. ipv4-mapped support is definitely used.
Adding support for this later as a separate commit should be fine. Since ivp4-mapped-ipv6 addresses shouldn't appear on the wire giving them special treatment "later" should raise no compatibility concerns.
I think that we are very late in the cycle (linux-5.19 should be released in 5 days), and your patch set should not be merged so late.
This was posted in order to get code reviews, I'm not actually expecting inclusion.
To be clear, I am supporting this work and would like to see it being merged hopefully soon ;)