From nobody Thu Mar 27 15:11:29 2025 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 4ZNnDr063rz5rV3x for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 15:11:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@redbarn.org) Received: from util.redbarn.org (util.redbarn.org [24.104.150.222]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "*.redbarn.org", Issuer "RapidSSL TLS RSA CA G1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ZNnDp2t6Mz3DTC for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 15:11:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@redbarn.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=redbarn.org header.s=util header.b=sqAwofS6; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=redbarn.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of paul@redbarn.org designates 24.104.150.222 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=paul@redbarn.org Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "*.redbarn.org", Issuer "RapidSSL TLS RSA CA G1" (not verified)) by util.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A69A5160C27 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 15:11:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=redbarn.org; s=util; t=1743088290; bh=nL1gh3njqUu4SOScG+mbIWKGaRhaEpyUzwht6tN/z+Q=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=sqAwofS65NzRXKvK7VVm1wnkQaRXtlYbPQmEbrRYKxSHUzqXCMehDBXn6xVSok1uK 9jNzkfoIIA/8bDKlGVtwn5YPZc4ppkGDttvuBDRv2YKj1ytUIzmW4hlWeJl/462d+c BeUcU6x6/keehRATjQ3taS2Rt2vMk5jhezZ04pvw= Received: from localhost.localnet (unknown [207.188.251.170]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 41AC5C3F12; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 15:11:30 +0000 (UTC) From: Paul Vixie To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fibnum2.diff (Re: per-FIB socket binding) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 15:11:29 +0000 Message-ID: <2361964.ElGaqSPkdT@localhost> Organization: FW In-Reply-To: <3334751.oiGErgHkdL@localhost> References: <7772475.EvYhyI6sBW@dhcp-151.access.rits.tisf.net> <4bc4c988-3df1-4823-9769-b881be1f70d7@elischer.org> <3334751.oiGErgHkdL@localhost> 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.79 / 15.00]; RBL_SENDERSCORE_REPUT_9(-1.00)[24.104.150.222:from]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.92)[-0.923]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.88)[0.880]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.85)[-0.849]; CTE_CASE(0.50)[]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW_WITH_FAILURES(-0.50)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:24.104.150.0/24]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[24.104.150.213:received]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[redbarn.org:-]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(0.00)[redbarn.org,reject]; R_DKIM_REJECT(0.00)[redbarn.org:s=util]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[paul]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; ASN(0.00)[asn:33651, ipnet:24.104.150.0/24, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4ZNnDp2t6Mz3DTC X-Spamd-Bar: - On Friday, March 21, 2025 8:22:56 AM UTC Paul Vixie wrote: > This is a reply to the second of two of Julian's recent messages. > > On Friday, March 14, 2025 4:45:48 AM UTC Julian Elischer wrote: > > > I think the order of evaluation would be Process FIB highest priority, > > followed by interface FIB. I do remember I was thinking about a fib > > value of -1 being "no fib.. I'm a pushover, do with me what you > > want". but I never really followed that through. > > we're using fib 0 for that today, and it works. i'll add your process-first > priority scheme in what i suppose will be called "fibnum3". i was mistaken. the desired process-first fibnum handling is already present in the kernel's socreate() function. if the process fib inherited by the new socket is nonzero, nothing lower down (soclone, sobind) will override that. so, the fibnum2 diff is hereby proposed for addition to main and backport to 14. (note, the diff i sent is against 14.2.) what's my next step? -- Paul Vixie