IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Spud] SPUD's open/close are unconvincing

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Thu, 09 April 2015 15:42 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Original-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE7C41B2DBB for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 08:42:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cis_w7_04h_a for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 08:42:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-f180.google.com (mail-ie0-f180.google.com [209.85.223.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A9151B2D96 for <spud@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iebmp1 with SMTP id mp1so104066655ieb.0 for <spud@ietf.org>; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 08:42:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=mOOFNYA4uaxjwG4iSHNse4nYZQK8tX5n1nlyLzFKfI0=; b=IuTc1O45QKpSGHdLSIeqJxxp0tbRrRhg33qqJG7C/55/A80u8+XrbqsgMLUGd9cU1H LSAcKL25LEhB+4+SQ5IDDadTqhxRS5hKI/QxrfngNi+d0lNg2hfaUaeLw10gdX6YwRc8 1CRo7Re7LpTGPMzRATNPPj8CJoVrQZT56H38v5HJkcJ1YEI1m05/QMqdnh3djfFgYIh2 f6jxO3fp894X1T6ofGl7wPrYvNh6oZwHRMpUA/IJIQ9X/APvLocem8a45AU1RKEw6Cbu EUiKF3vDN+l1lOLu2Y/uG/NUO80oEpM/AsoP3ZYUDFPx1c8hTMofhJN2AgDZs7YuSPXJ Qgjg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlCYphdpYjBqHIUa3MaMikWMLWlCSx/hXvyuLf7bWfmrm0Dj9sYL+Sk+uuTdufRY+sQH6DP
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.142.67 with SMTP id ru3mr21160251igb.16.1428594127581; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 08:42:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.149.15 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 08:42:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150409135509.GK24286@cisco.com>
References: <87iod631nv.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <DM2PR0301MB06555C7D7F32A69214405D44A8FC0@DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <20150408193920.GD24286@cisco.com> <871tju2rdq.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <20150409012229.GG24286@cisco.com> <CALx6S35NH9yPZxeARTic10b0jFEi8aC4Gmt79cxuzF_VpYYqLA@mail.gmail.com> <20150409041507.GJ24286@cisco.com> <CAMm+LwgD8Foe=JdJvZ4oeuhGkJJvUaNOsCJATGDsRmBwN4en_w@mail.gmail.com> <20150409135509.GK24286@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 08:42:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S35a2uGgRXBZSouLfEE-1CU8khSuz66=P_xg7c28FBAbSw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
To: Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/ufQiBv-ueJGkOHuS0V1m4qJ8ozE>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, "spud@ietf.org" <spud@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Spud] SPUD's open/close are unconvincing
X-BeenThere: spud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Protocol Underneath Datagrams <spud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spud/>
List-Post: <mailto:spud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 15:42:11 -0000

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 09:09:17AM -0400, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> TCP should probably not happen in the kernel either. Nor should
>> printer drivers be in the kernel or anything that does not require the
>> intermediation of the security monitor.
>
> Right. As an OS person i would love for someone to implement a
> "raw transport socket" option for unprivileged processes. Implement
> in linux, go to POSIX, spend a decade trying to get it proliferated across
> OSs.
>
Good luck on finding an OS vendor willing to give random applications
unfettered access to the network. Anyway, you can already do this by
just wrapping whatever you want in UDP-- TCP, SCTP, RDMA, whatever.

Tom

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email