| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 19:39:07 +0100 From: Robert Shearman <rshearma@...cade.com> To: roopa <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com> CC: <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, <tgraf@...g.ch>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v2 1/3] lwt: infrastructure to support light weight tunnels On 19/06/15 19:34, roopa wrote: > On 6/19/15, 10:25 AM, Robert Shearman wrote: >> n 19/06/15 16:14, roopa wrote: >>> Today lwtunnel_skb_lwstate is called from lwtunnel_output which is only >>> called from ipv4 code. >>> And my ipv6 variant code was supposed to have a 6 suffix. something like >>> lwtunnel_output6. >>> Or to be more explicit i will probably have variants of the output and >>> skb handling functions like, >>> lwtunnel_output_ipv4 and lwtunnel_output_ipv6. >> >> Do you intend for these functions to be used by netdevices to support >> the vxlan use case? >> >> If so, then how will the netdevice know which one of the two to call? >> Will there have to be a netdevice for ipv4 and a netdevice for ipv6? >> >> If not, could you outline how you intend for it to be implemented? > > In the netdevice case, this output function is not called atall. It > should just follow the existing netdevice the route is pointing to. Sorry for not being clear, but I meant that there would have to be lwtunnel_skb_lwstate functions for ipv4 and ipv6 to match the output functions. So in the vxlan use case where it's using a netdevice, how would it determine which one to call? Thanks, Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
Powered by blists - more mailing lists