[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(usagi-users 02475) Kernel patches changing behavior of socket bind()
- To: usagi-users <usagi-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: (usagi-users 02475) Kernel patches changing behavior of socket bind()
- From: Mark Huth <mhuth@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:27:08 -0700
- Reply-to: usagi-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 15:38:57 +0900
- Resent-from: sekiya@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <200307171538.FMLAAB19477.usagi-users@linux-ipv6.org>
- Resent-to: usagi-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated)
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
I notice that certain of the usagi patches to 2.4.18+ kernels modify the
behavior of get_port in the various protocols, causing the isc dhcp
server and relay to fail. I've examined the code and can readily fix
either the server or the kernel to work. However, I would like to
understand the motivation for some of the kernel changes. I need to
decide what "flavor" of SO_REUSEADDR to support, and consequently, what
behavior the damons should expect.
The stock kernel basically allows SO_REUSEADDR to allow unlimited
bindings to the same socket tuple. This behavior is basically carried
forward into the 2.5 snd 2.6.test kernels. The usagi IPV6 patches
change the behavior to be more selective and configurable - SO_REUSEADDR
is mapped into the SO_REUSEPORT equivalent for multicast addresses,
device and address bindings must be specified for both sockets to avoid
a reuse error, MODERATE_REUSE is allowed to be configured to protect a
DOS attack, and perhaps a couple of other nits.
We need to release a distribution supporting IPV6, and we generally use
the usagi patches. However, I need your input to decide what sort of
reuse we need to support.
Comments, please.
Thanks,
Mark Huth