- most of the kernel code will not care about the actual encoding of
scope zone IDs and won't touch "s6_addr16[1]" directly.
- similarly, most of the kernel code will not care about link-local
scoped addresses as a special case.
- scope boundary check will be stricter. For example, the current
*BSD code allows a packet with src=::1 and dst=(some global IPv6
address) to be sent outside of the node, if the application do:
s = socket(AF_INET6);
bind(s, "::1");
sendto(s, some_global_IPv6_addr);
This is clearly wrong, since ::1 is only meaningful within a single
node, but the current implementation of the *BSD kernel cannot
reject this attempt.
- and, while there, don't try to remove the ff02::/32 interface route
entry in in6_ifdetach() as it's already gone.
This also includes some level of support for the standard source
address selection algorithm defined in RFC3484, which will be
completed on in the future.
From the KAME project via JINMEI Tatuya.
Approved by core@.
otherwise SADB_X_SPDDELETE2 and SADB_X_SPDFLUSH can free per-pcb policies
erroneously. it's the identical with what kame repository has.
ok'ed by itojun@
support IPv6 if KAME IPSEC (RFC is not explicit about how we make data stream
for checksum with IPv6, but i'm pretty sure using normal pseudo-header is the
right thing).
XXX
current TCP MD5 signature code has giant flaw:
it does not validate signature on input (can't believe it! what is the point?)
Gone are the old kern_sysctl(), cpu_sysctl(), hw_sysctl(),
vfs_sysctl(), etc, routines, along with sysctl_int() et al. Now all
nodes are registered with the tree, and nodes can be added (or
removed) easily, and I/O to and from the tree is handled generically.
Since the nodes are registered with the tree, the mapping from name to
number (and back again) can now be discovered, instead of having to be
hard coded. Adding new nodes to the tree is likewise much simpler --
the new infrastructure handles almost all the work for simple types,
and just about anything else can be done with a small helper function.
All existing nodes are where they were before (numerically speaking),
so all existing consumers of sysctl information should notice no
difference.
PS - I'm sorry, but there's a distinct lack of documentation at the
moment. I'm working on sysctl(3/8/9) right now, and I promise to
watch out for buses.
rpaulo