Re: Should jail treat ip-number?

Yoshinobu Inoue (shinnd.net.fujitsu.co.jp)
Wed, 10 Nov 1999 02:58:53 +0900

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Next message: Ollivier Robert: "Re: Port 137 hitting my server"
• Previous message: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• In reply to: Yoshinobu Inoue: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• Next in thread: Yoshinobu Inoue: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• Next in thread: Ollivier Robert: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• Next in thread: sthaugnethelp.no: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• Reply: Yoshinobu Inoue: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"

> I'm not against adding IPv6 functionality to jail(2), my point is
> merely that until somebody who has sufficient time & ability to
> fiddle with it does it, it's not going to happen.
>
> The usual rule applies:
>
> "Great idea, why don't you send me patches which does this ?"

OK, then I'll try making patches and send you.
My current Idea is that adding a new member, a pointer to
sockaddr to the jail structure, and leave current ip_number
member for backward compatibility.
(Also with associated changes in kernel and the jail command)

Yoshinobu Inoue

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomoFreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message

• Next message: Ollivier Robert: "Re: Port 137 hitting my server"
• Previous message: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• In reply to: Yoshinobu Inoue: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• Next in thread: Yoshinobu Inoue: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• Next in thread: Ollivier Robert: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• Next in thread: sthaugnethelp.no: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"
• Reply: Yoshinobu Inoue: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Nov 09 1999 - 11:59:11 CST