netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] mpls: multipath support

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:	Wed, 12 Aug 2015 18:30:14 +0100
From:	Robert Shearman <rshearma@...cade.com>
To:	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	<ebiederm@...ssion.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] mpls: multipath support

On 11/08/15 22:45, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
> From: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
>
> This patch series adds multipath support to mpls routes.
>
> resembles ipv4 multipath support. The multipath route nexthop
> selection algorithm is the same code as in ipv4 fib code.
>
> I understand that the multipath algorithm in ipv4 is undergoing
> some changes and will move mpls to similar algo if applicable once
> those get merged.

Is it necessary for the mpls patch selection algorithm to closely 
resemble the ipv4 one? A flow based algorithm would be much better for 
traffic that is sensitive to re-ordering (e.g TCP, L2VPN) and IMHO we 
should do this from the start for MPLS.

I've also been looking at implementing this functionality. I've got a 
set of patches for this that I can send if you'd like.

>
> mpls multipath support can be moved under CONFIG_MPLS_ROUTE_MULTIPATH if
> needed similar to CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH. I started with that
> but that resulted in too many #ifdef CONFIG_MPLS_ROUTE_MULTIPATH
> throughout the af_mpls code. If there is a strong reason
> to introduce a config option, I will respin v2 with
> CONFIG_MPLS_ROUTE_MULTIPATH. These multipath patches do not introduce
> any UAPI changes.

I agree with not having such a config option - I can't see a strong 
reason for it.

Thanks,
Rob

>
> example iproute2 usage:
> $ip -f mpls route add 100 nexthop as 200 via inet 10.1.1.2 dev swp1 \
> 	nexthop as 300 via inet 10.1.1.6 dev swp2
>
> $ip -f mpls route show
> 100
> 	nexthop as to 200 via inet 10.1.1.2  dev swp1
> 	nexthop as to 300 via inet 10.1.1.6  dev swp2
>
>
> Roopa Prabhu (3):
>    mpls: move mpls_route nexthop fields to a new nhlfe struct
>    mpls: consistently use u8 to store number of labels
>    mpls: add multipath route support
>
>   include/net/mpls_iptunnel.h |    2 +-
>   net/mpls/af_mpls.c          |  519 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>   net/mpls/internal.h         |   44 +++-
>   3 files changed, 437 insertions(+), 128 deletions(-)
>
--
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