Le 02/05/2019 à 09:46, Florian Westphal a écrit : > Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I understand your point, but this is a regression. Ignoring a field/attribute of >> a netlink message is part of the uAPI. This field exists for more than a decade >> (probably two), so you cannot just use it because nobody was using it. Just see >> all discussions about strict validation of netlink messages. >> Moreover, the conntrack tool exists also for ages and is an official tool. > > FWIW I agree with Nicolas, we should restore old behaviour and flush > everything when AF_INET is given. We can add new netlink attr to To avoid regression, we sould ignore it, AF_INET or not. > restrict this. Yes.
