Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:01:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ganesha.gnumonks.org (Debian-exim@ganesha.gnumonks.org [213.95.27.120]) by oss.sgi.com (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i7JH0o0M023341 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:00:53 -0700 Received: from dsl-082-082-102-023.arcor-ip.net ([82.82.102.23] helo=sunbeam.gnumonks.org) by ganesha.gnumonks.org with asmtp (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.30) id 1BxqHL-0003nw-QC; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:00:43 +0200 Received: from laforge by sunbeam.gnumonks.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1BxqHI-0005Se-Sp; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:00:40 +0200 Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:00:40 +0200 From: Harald Welte To: "David S. Miller" Cc: yasuyuki.kozakai@toshiba.co.jp, kaber@trash.net, kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu, kisza@securityaudit.hu, netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, usagi-core@linux-ipv6.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Do you know about skb_header_pointer() ? Message-ID: <20040819170040.GW3921@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Mail-Followup-To: Harald Welte , "David S. Miller" , yasuyuki.kozakai@toshiba.co.jp, kaber@trash.net, kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu, kisza@securityaudit.hu, netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, usagi-core@linux-ipv6.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com References: <200408190721.QAA02944@toshiba.co.jp> <20040819094401.GY3921@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> <20040819071750.67f0e924.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="NgVbDbWK8YZhIM7w" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040819071750.67f0e924.davem@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i X-archive-position: 7905 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: laforge@netfilter.org Precedence: bulk X-list: netdev Content-Length: 1874 Lines: 53 --NgVbDbWK8YZhIM7w Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 07:17:50AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:44:01 +0200 > Harald Welte wrote: >=20 > > http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter-devel/2004-August/016277= =2Ehtml >=20 > I totally disagree with this change. Ok, that's fine with me. Let's stay with the skb_header_pointer(), which by the way [as expected] is not visible on my profile runs. Still, I am curious to know if anyone on one of the Cc'ed mailinglists can imagine a case where parts of the header up and including the tcp options could be non-linear. And no, I do not want to know this in order to say that skb_heder_pointer() is bad. I just want to know, because then we might still need some magic for those cases in order to avoid a case where we end up with per-rule copies or similar stuff again. Thanks! --=20 - Harald Welte http://www.netfilter.org/ =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going on while IP was being designed." -- Paul Vixie --NgVbDbWK8YZhIM7w Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBJNy4XaXGVTD0i/8RAhmdAJ0Q9BYtbHuvWy/d8aUx2kgnaZv6nACgrvDy Cn9ugff7nwiPePoEsXcDNCY= =e4bT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --NgVbDbWK8YZhIM7w--