Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

pf: Remove partial RFC2675 support
ClosedPublic

Authored by kp on Jul 27 2019, 1:32 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Apr 20, 3:25 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Fri, Apr 19, 2:26 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Fri, Apr 19, 9:09 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, Apr 16, 10:18 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Apr 6, 5:02 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jan 1 2024, 7:19 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 14 2023, 6:05 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 9 2023, 7:17 PM
Subscribers

Details

Reviewers
thj
Group Reviewers
network
Commits
rS350414: pf: Remove partial RFC2675 support
Summary

Remove our (very partial) support for RFC2675 Jumbograms. They're not
used, not actually supported and not a good idea.

Diff Detail

Lint
Lint Passed
Unit
No Test Coverage
Build Status
Buildable 25537
Build 24152: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

kp set the repository for this revision to rS FreeBSD src repository - subversion.
sys/netpfil/pf/pf_norm.c
1237

if we don't support jumbo, shouldn't we just drop any packet with the jumbo option? i.e.

case IP6OPT_JUMP: goto drop

and then we can remove all this handling?

Remove more bits, as suggested by thj

kp marked an inline comment as done.Jul 28 2019, 7:45 PM
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Jul 28 2019, 8:01 PM

Does this mean that you concluded in the IETF mailing list to drop this support?

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
In D21086#457948, @ae wrote:

Does this mean that you concluded in the IETF mailing list to drop this support?

I listened in to the relevant session in the IETF meeting, and while I don't know if there was a firm conclusion even those opposing moving RFC2675 to historic status were very clear that its implementation is optional, and it's entirely okay to not support it.