lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jul]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] net: bridge: ensure that link-local traffic cannot unlock a locked port
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 4:03 PM Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 04:46:10PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > Here, what happens is that a locked port learns the MAC SA from the
> > traffic it didn't drop, i.e. link-local. In other words, the bridge
> > behaves as expected and instructed: +locked +learning will cause just
> > that. It's the administrator's fault for not disabling learning.
> > It's also the mv88e6xxx driver's fault for not validating the "locked" +
> > "learning" brport flag *combination* until it properly supports "+locked
> > +learning" (the feature you are currently working on).
> >
> > I'm still confused why we don't just say that "+locked -learning" means
> > plain 802.1X, "+locked +learning" means MAB where we learn locked FDB entries.
>
> Or is it the problem that a "+locked +learning" bridge port will learn
> MAC SA from link-local traffic, but it will create FDB entries without
> the locked flag while doing so? The mv88e6xxx driver should react to the
> 'locked' flag from both directions (ADD_TO_DEVICE too, not just ADD_TO_BRIDGE).

Yes, it creates an FDB entry in the bridge without the locked flag
set, and sends an ADD_TO_DEVICE notice with it.
And furthermore link-local packets include of course EAPOL packets, so
that's why +learning is a problem.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-07-17 18:26    [W:0.037 / U:2.916 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site