netdev - Re: Open vSwitch Design

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:23:25 -0500
From:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, shemminger@...tta.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, dev@...nvswitch.org, chrisw@...hat.com,
	herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
	jpettit@...ira.com, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Subject: Re: Open vSwitch Design

On Fri, 2011-11-25 at 12:20 -0800, Jesse Gross wrote:

> The flow classifier isn't really designed to do rule lookup in the way
> that OpenFlow/Open vSwitch does, since it's more about choosing which
> fields are considered significant to the flow.  I'm sure that it could
> be extended in some way but it seems that the better approach would be
> to factor out the common pieces (such as the header extraction
> mentioned before) than try to cram both models into one component.

Yes, it would need a tweak or two.
But u32 would. And the action subsystem does.

> I understand that you see some commonalities with various parts of the
> system but often there are enough conceptual differences that you end
> up trying to shove a square peg into a round hole. 

I have done this for years. I have very good knowledge of merchant
sillicom and i have programmed them on Linux; i know this space a lot
more than you are assuming.
If you can point me to _one_, just _one_ thing, that you do in the
classifier action piece that cannot be done in Linux today and is
more flexible in your setup than it is on Linux we can have a
useful discussion.

>  As Stephen
> mentioned about the bridge, many of these components are already
> fairly complex and combining more functionality into them isn't always
> a win.

I think the bridge started on a bad foot for not properly integrating
with Vlans and tightly integrating STP control in the kernel.

cheers,
jamal

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html