| To: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [NAT-T] NON-IKE encapsulation |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 25 Jun 2004 10:12:31 -0700 |
| Cc: | agruen@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040624123603.GA1241@gondor.apana.org.au> |
| References: | <20040624123603.GA1241@gondor.apana.org.au> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 22:36:03 +1000 Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm having trouble understanding why we need to increase alen by > two bytes for NON-IKE. As far as I can see it's adding two bytes > of random data to the end of the packet. Is there something > obvious that I'm missing? I now think it's trying to account for the udpdata32[] header area. But that's not 2 bytes, it's (2 * sizeof(u32)) or 8 bytes. The ESP added headers amount to esp->auth.icv_trunc_len + 8 in this case, so changing the "alen += 2;" into "alen += 8;" seems more appropriate. What do you think Herbert? Does it make sense now? |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: TCP congestion control article, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [UDP] Check encap_type at config time, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [NAT-T] NON-IKE encapsulation, Herbert Xu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [NAT-T] NON-IKE encapsulation, Herbert Xu |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |