| To: | davem@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] IPsec policy can be matched by ICMP type and code |
| From: | YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:32:29 +0900 (JST) |
| Cc: | nakam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, usagi-core@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040809170705.6ab75c5f.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | USAGI Project |
| References: | <20040809175404.301bd60a@localhost> <20040809170705.6ab75c5f.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
In article <20040809170705.6ab75c5f.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> (at Mon, 9 Aug 2004 17:07:05 -0700), "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> says: > Truly %100 RAW sockets should have their packets untouched by > the kernel. User wants exactly that packet to be sent onto > the wire. Does it make sense to excude IPPPROTO_RAW sockets and/or hdrincl sockets, which would be 100% truly raw socket? Or, do we add some socket option for this? Mip6 is required to exchange ipsec'ed datagrams (!= IPPROTO_RAW). (as I told you at Networking Summit if I remember correctly), so we need some sort of the patch, anyway. Thanks. --yoshfuji |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] IPsec policy can be matched by ICMP type and code, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH][IPv6] separation xfrm_lookup from ip6_dst_lookup, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] IPsec policy can be matched by ICMP type and code, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] IPsec policy can be matched by ICMP type and code, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |