Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 11:39:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, imp@village.org (Warner Losh), liam@tiora.net (Liam Slusser), kdrobnac@mission.mvnc.edu (Kenny Drobnack), Harry_M_Leitzell@cmu.edu (Harry M. Leitzell), security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BPF on in 3.3-RC GENERIC kernel Message-ID: <199909181839.LAA66478@apollo.backplane.com> References: <12434.937679573@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:In message <199909181819.LAA66207@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon writes:
:> In regards to the jail call, I still strongly recommend that the syscall
:> be changed to take a sockaddr before it becomes too late, or we will blow
:> compatibility with IPV6 coming up in the near future.
:>
:> -Matt
:
:Until we know more about how IPv6 multihoming will work it is too
:early to say what kind of argument we will need to pass to jail(2)
:for IPv6.
:
:--
:Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
Let me put it this way: Passing an unsigned 32 bit integer is obviously
the *WRONG* type of argument to pass for an IP address considering that
just about every single other system call takes a sockaddr of one sort
or another.
And, frankly, it is not too early. There's nothing wrong with a
sockaddr. It's a typed data structure so compatibility will be
maintained no matter what happens with IPV6. There is even already an
IPV6 family defined for it.
Now is the time. If you throw it into -STABLE without this, then you
will screw over the people who are trying to use it when you eventually
have to make the change, creating totally unnecessary pain in the process.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199909181839.LAA66478>