On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 17:52, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 05:20:57PM +0100, klavs klavsen wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> > 
> > While hoping to test vserver on 2.5 (which includes USAGI - but
> > unfortunately not vserver yet) at some point :) I'm trying to patch my
> > 2.4.20 kernel with Usage (www.linux-ipv6.org) and cryptoapi. 
> 
> first, as far as I know the crypto api was created
> to separate the crypto issues from the kernel and
> establish a single interface point (which is the
> patched loop device) ... so I would suggest to patch
> the crypto stuff last, because it should "adapt"
> 
I only patched the loopback device - but no problem - unfortunately
doesn't change anything :(

[SNIP]
> > when looking in tcp_ipv4.c I find that the patch #hunk 2:
> > 
> > *** 201,207 ****
> >                             !sk2->reuse ||
> >                             sk2->state == TCP_LISTEN) {
> > !                               if (!sk2->rcv_saddr     ||
> > !                                   !sk->rcv_saddr      ||
> > !                                   (sk2->rcv_saddr == sk->rcv_saddr))
> >                                         break;
> >                         }
> > --- 251,255 ----
> >                             !sk2->reuse ||
> >                             sk2->state == TCP_LISTEN) {
> > !                               if (tcp_ipv4_addr_conflict(sk,sk2))
> >                                         break;
> >                         }
> > ***************
> > 
> > the line sk2->state == TCP_LISTEN is nowhere to be found in tcp_ipv4
> > (since the USAGI patch was applied) so I'm at a loss, to figure out a
> > way to get USAGI and vserver working together on 2.4.20.
> 
> had a look at usagi-linux24-s20030120-2.4.20.diff.bz2

same I used :)
> (don't know which version you used) but a look at the 
> diff should show you the following lines ...
> 
> @@ -177,23 +191,157 @@
> 
>   ...
> 
> -                         sk2->state == TCP_LISTEN) {
> -                             if (!sk2->rcv_saddr     ||
> -                                 !sk->rcv_saddr      ||
> -                                 (sk2->rcv_saddr == sk->rcv_saddr))
> -                                     break;
> +#if defined(CONFIG_NET_RESTRICTED_REUSE) || 
>defined(CONFIG_IPV6_RESTRICTED_DOUBLE_BIND)
> +             uid_t sk2_uid;
> +             int uid_ok;
> +#endif
> +             int both_specified = 0;
>   
>   ...
> 
> I guess this "was" the code addressed in the vserver
> patch ... (hope this helps)
> 
Thank you for this - but unfortunately I'm not even close too knowing
enough to figure out, how I get an "if (tcp_ipv4_addr_conflict(sk,sk2))
break;" in the replacement code.

> > I was hoping perhaps any of you had suggestions? Perhaps any you would
> > like a kernel that supports IPV6 (including IPSEC - which the current
> > 2.4 ipv6 doesn't - which is also probably why USAGI went in to the 2.5
> > kernel) and vserver :)
> 
> IPv6, as far as I know, is still on Jacques TODO list, 
> so the IPv6 with or without IPSEC will lack the vserver
> features until this is done (right Jacques?)
> 
Though this is correct, still one would be able to use IPv6 addresses -
and then use iptables rules to rewrite them internally to a ipv4 vserver
service, right(?) 

> > Thank you for just reading this far ;)
> 
> you are welcome
> 
Thanks again Herbert :)
 
-- 
Regards,
Klavs Klavsen

--------------| This mail has been sent to you by: |------------
              Klavs Klavsen - Open Source Consultant 
            [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.EnableIT.dk

    Get PGP key from www.keyserver.net - Key ID: 0x586D5BCA 
Fingerprint = 2873 188C 968E 600D D8F8  B8DA 3D3A 0B79 7E06 3C62
----------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for.
                                                 -- unknown

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to