From: Nikolay Borisov <kernel@kyup•com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission•com>
Cc: davem@davemloft•net, netdev@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Namespacify inet_peer_* sysctl knobs
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:04:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56C5DD6C.1050504@kyup.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87si0r4086.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
On 02/17/2016 09:15 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Nikolay Borisov <kernel@kyup•com> writes:
>
>> This series make the inet_peer ttl sysctls to be namespace aware.
>>
>> Patch 1 adds a namespace association to the inet_peer_base struct,
>> which in turn is used to make the sysctls namespace aware. The
>> rest of the patches are straightforward.
>
> At a quick skim I am not certain I am comfortable with this change.
>
> The issue is that these are not packet parameters you are tuning but
> lifetimes for data structures.
Right, I though the inet peer expiration might have repercussion on the
way the networking stack worked. But apparently that's not case.
>
> Generally there are challenges making this kind of thing per namespace
> because resource control can lead to DOS attack from one namespace
> being able to arbitrarly control it's own resource consumption.
>
> Is this something that is actually worth making per namespace?
I guess the series can be dropped if it's deemed unnecessary.
>
> Eric
>
>> Nikolay Borisov (4):
>> inetpeer: Add net namespace assosication in inet_peer_base
>> inetpeer: Namespacify inet_peer_maxttl sysctl knob
>> inetpeer: Namespacify inet_peer_minttl sysctl knob
>> inetpeer: Namespacify inet_peer_threshold sysctl knob
>>
>> include/net/inetpeer.h | 1 +
>> include/net/ip.h | 5 -----
>> include/net/netns/ipv4.h | 4 ++++
>> net/ipv4/inetpeer.c | 15 ++++++---------
>> net/ipv4/route.c | 1 +
>> net/ipv4/sysctl_net_ipv4.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>> 6 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-18 15:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-17 10:09 [PATCH 0/4] Namespacify inet_peer_* sysctl knobs Nikolay Borisov
2016-02-17 10:09 ` [PATCH 1/4] inetpeer: Add net namespace assosication in inet_peer_base Nikolay Borisov
2016-02-17 10:09 ` [PATCH 2/4] inetpeer: Namespacify inet_peer_maxttl sysctl knob Nikolay Borisov
2016-02-17 10:09 ` [PATCH 3/4] inetpeer: Namespacify inet_peer_minttl " Nikolay Borisov
2016-02-17 10:09 ` [PATCH 4/4] inetpeer: Namespacify inet_peer_threshold " Nikolay Borisov
2016-02-17 19:15 ` [PATCH 0/4] Namespacify inet_peer_* sysctl knobs Eric W. Biederman
2016-02-18 15:04 ` Nikolay Borisov [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56C5DD6C.1050504@kyup.com \
--to=kernel@kyup$(echo .)com \
--cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission$(echo .)com \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox