From nobody Wed May 8 19:14:14 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-net@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4VZPw53n5zz5K1wh for ; Wed, 08 May 2024 19:14:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lf1-f43.google.com (mail-lf1-f43.google.com [209.85.167.43]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VZPw4647yz4DDl for ; Wed, 8 May 2024 19:14:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=freebsd.org (policy=none); spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of carpeddiem@gmail.com designates 209.85.167.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=carpeddiem@gmail.com Received: by mail-lf1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-51fea3031c3so58584e87.0 for ; Wed, 08 May 2024 12:14:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1715195667; x=1715800467; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=zpsO2mKdYAibHCZ4FDTwzkiet1GoFA963EgIoWwXaY0=; b=hPDH5jRsXoreTJi3IhqI3vA4SmDEYba52vmtfyv7VimfP2T5M9sZe7ZIgN4G6eibzA H2WfqBgAGcNbY2zOM/3wA6cp6vxabVotbutrsmG2ClsJiAHWF5qPvBbdcHkG+vVR7+yy 3O6L8Ne6qE8xpexmECzJgNj1Q6vR7QMK+57tRKbvtfoTJ5Y0+neWcAzSjQXg67PS534A BwAOYgPE/GT4bv4hMGIFLivbof4QLjDDwZRjG+QgNPe4Ukj4BjJx8DMNr32DwhZLulGl 9zx42McDhz530jJiSDUGVBB9VR8rYboj8UPQ81leBjHlhUCmqWWg/6EZaSppkk7P2aUf ogYA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YywV4yPyHgayfEEYylv7cB+WU8Xx9IXcBR2F2AfSYT49TBEO7Xf 2pEpQhhhAD1Xs+nxZSNSA8eZoBsgL1n9wDSG73p3Cx+FZGH5Z7V7sqq6O7KPbOBFLD4qnyKam+r V3oXlYbMralXmu7La7j5K0KNhFUzl/A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEMQC7x0a2a/3ef2OGtrk2X8SuS+aZgcW9MgFK32PxUulXPFCsUEzeJZknzU/fOdmcK+USwbBW54WzyKqE08g4= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:42c1:0:b0:51d:1d32:c676 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5217c760719mr2950173e87.37.1715195666353; Wed, 08 May 2024 12:14:26 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Ed Maste Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 15:14:14 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Discarding inbound ICMP REDIRECT by default To: Marek Zarychta Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.71 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.999]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.996]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.81)[-0.810]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[freebsd.org : SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM,none]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[carpeddiem]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[209.85.167.43:from]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[209.85.167.43:from] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4VZPw4647yz4DDl On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 14:35, Marek Zarychta wrote: > > But what about IPv6 ? We have "net.inet6.icmp6.rediraccept" knob which > defaults to 1. Can ICMPv6 redirects be fixed along with the change > proposed for the legacy IP protocol? It may make sense to apply the same default change for IPv6, but I don't think we need to tie the two discussions / investigations together.