Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:11:10 -0500
From:      "Adrian Chadd" <adrian@freebsd.org>
To:        "Attila Nagy" <bra@fsn.hu>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r186955 - in head/sys: conf netinet
Message-ID:  <d763ac660901091411x40eb8084v134f0ab2189afddb@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4967C539.2060803@fsn.hu>
References:  <200901091602.n09G2Jj1061164@svn.freebsd.org> <4967A500.30205@fsn.hu> <4967B6D9.90001@elischer.org> <4967C539.2060803@fsn.hu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Well, they can be used mostly interchangably - they socket option is
just implemented at a different layer.

Porting should be a case of a simple #ifdef. :)

I wonder what pf changes are needed..


Adrian

2009/1/9 Attila Nagy <bra@fsn.hu>:
> Julian Elischer wrote:
>>
>> Attila Nagy wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Author: adrian
>>>> Date: Fri Jan  9 16:02:19 2009
>>>> New Revision: 186955
>>>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/186955
>>>>
>>>> Log:
>>>>  Implement a new IP option (not compiled/enabled by default) to allow
>>>>  applications to specify a non-local IP address when bind()'ing a socket
>>>>  to a local endpoint.
>>>>    This allows applications to spoof the client IP address of
>>>> connections
>>>>  if (obviously!) they somehow are able to receive the traffic normally
>>>>  destined to said clients.
>>>>    This patch doesn't include any changes to ipfw or the bridging code
>>>> to
>>>>  redirect the client traffic through the PCB checks so TCP gets a shot
>>>>  at it. The normal behaviour is that packets with a non-local
>>>> destination
>>>>  IP address are not handled locally. This can be dealth with some IPFW
>>>> hackery;
>>>>  modifications to IPFW to make this less hacky will occur in subsequent
>>>>  commmits.
>>>>    Thanks to Julian Elischer and others at Ironport. This work was
>>>> approved
>>>>  and donated before Cisco acquired them.
>>>>    Obtained from:    Julian Elischer and others
>>>>  MFC after:    2 weeks
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be better to implement existing interfaces for that?
>>> OpenBSD has a SO_BINDANY socket option and it seems it's also in BSD/OS:
>>> http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&w=2&r=1&s=bindany&q=b
>>
>> good point
>
> BTW, it also makes easier to port OpenBSD's relayd (and of course other
> applications relying on this). pf has some related changes there too, which
> helps programs to use this feature.
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d763ac660901091411x40eb8084v134f0ab2189afddb>