Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*PATCH\:\s+IPSEC\s+acquire\s+in\s+presence\s+of\s+multiple\s+managers\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. ouble dip (score: 1)
Author: xx>
Date: 25 Mar 2005 19:12:07 -0500
Acquire should be supported by both pfkey and netlink. However, it stops to send acquire message from the kernel on first success. It is possible that one or the other manager maybe passively monito
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01465.html (9,341 bytes)

2. PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: di@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:30:58 +1100
Yes that's a good catch. One problem though is that if theal real KM is dead but the passive monitor is still there then the kernel will have to wait for the larval states to time out. It can happen
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01466.html (10,157 bytes)

3. managers (score: 1)
Author: f@xxxxxxx>
Date: 25 Mar 2005 19:54:31 -0500
Agreed. Well its useful even if we could just run "ip mon" to look at acquires going across. If i understood correctly pfkey: the kernel can be told when a KM is about to die or just came back up usi
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01468.html (10,477 bytes)

4. PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:58:55 +1100
I haven't checked af_key but netlink does support that. All you have to do is send messages to the correct multicast group. Of course whether any of the KMs actually deal with it is a different story
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01469.html (10,389 bytes)

5. PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 02:23:38 +0100
Herbert Xu wrote: On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 07:54:31PM -0500, jamal wrote: It seems that we dont support any acquires from userspace to kernel I haven't checked af_key but netlink does support that. Al
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01470.html (11,058 bytes)

6. PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: t@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 25 Mar 2005 20:11:00 -0500
What i have seen being described is as follows: user space app --> kernel acquire with all necessary parameters kernel --> XFRMGRP_ACQURE acquire as it would right now with an outbound packet some KM
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01471.html (11,113 bytes)

7. n presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: u <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:32:02 +1100
You're right. Neither xfrm_user/af_key is doing this at the moment. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01473.html (10,471 bytes)

8. PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 26 Mar 2005 13:41:27 -0500
You could say i am obssesed by this aquire message - I dont know why;-> I noticed in the absence of a responsive KM, the acquires are sent forever. Is it 30 seconds and may be degenerating to 60 seco
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01490.html (10,772 bytes)

9. le managers (score: 1)
Author: <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 05:42:17 +1000
It's only sitting there forever because ping is configured to send packets forever by default. Try ping -c 1 and things will probably be different. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.or
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01496.html (10,973 bytes)

10. x-2.6.11-bk10 1/1] r8169: incoming frame length check (score: 1)
Author: o@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 05:45:03 +1000
Actually it won't. It will try it forever when the larval state expires. When we fix the xfrm state resolution, we can add a knob for this case. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01498.html (10,923 bytes)

11. link events (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 26 Mar 2005 15:06:25 -0500
When you get that and need someone to test just post it and i will. cheers, jamal
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg01501.html (10,975 bytes)

12. PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 25 Mar 2005 19:12:07 -0500
Herbert/Dave, Acquire should be supported by both pfkey and netlink. However, it stops to send acquire message from the kernel on first success. It is possible that one or the other manager maybe pas
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03388.html (9,341 bytes)

13. Re: PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:30:58 +1100
Yes that's a good catch. One problem though is that if theal real KM is dead but the passive monitor is still there then the kernel will have to wait for the larval states to time out. It can happen
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03389.html (10,268 bytes)

14. Re: PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 25 Mar 2005 19:54:31 -0500
Agreed. Well its useful even if we could just run "ip mon" to look at acquires going across. If i understood correctly pfkey: the kernel can be told when a KM is about to die or just came back up usi
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03391.html (10,570 bytes)

15. Re: PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:58:55 +1100
I haven't checked af_key but netlink does support that. All you have to do is send messages to the correct multicast group. Of course whether any of the KMs actually deal with it is a different story
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03392.html (10,563 bytes)

16. Re: PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 02:23:38 +0100
It seems that we dont support any acquires from userspace to kernel I haven't checked af_key but netlink does support that. All you have to do is send messages to the correct multicast group. Of cou
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03393.html (11,147 bytes)

17. Re: PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 25 Mar 2005 20:11:00 -0500
What i have seen being described is as follows: user space app --> kernel acquire with all necessary parameters kernel --> XFRMGRP_ACQURE acquire as it would right now with an outbound packet some KM
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03394.html (11,269 bytes)

18. Re: PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:32:02 +1100
You're right. Neither xfrm_user/af_key is doing this at the moment. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03396.html (10,549 bytes)

19. Re: PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 26 Mar 2005 13:41:27 -0500
You could say i am obssesed by this aquire message - I dont know why;-> I noticed in the absence of a responsive KM, the acquires are sent forever. Is it 30 seconds and may be degenerating to 60 seco
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03413.html (10,822 bytes)

20. Re: PATCH: IPSEC acquire in presence of multiple managers (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 05:42:17 +1000
It's only sitting there forever because ping is configured to send packets forever by default. Try ping -c 1 and things will probably be different. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.or
/archives/netdev/2005-03/msg03419.html (11,109 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu