linux-kernel - Re: [net-next,v2,4/5] seg6: add support for the SRv6 End.DT4 behavior

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, 13 Nov 2020 18:02:26 +0100
From:   Stefano Salsano <stefano.salsano@...roma2.it>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrea Mayer <andrea.mayer@...roma2.it>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Shrijeet Mukherjee <shrijeet@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Paolo Lungaroni <paolo.lungaroni@...t.it>,
        Ahmed Abdelsalam <ahabdels.dev@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next,v2,4/5] seg6: add support for the SRv6 End.DT4 behavior

Il 2020-11-13 17:55, Jakub Kicinski ha scritto:
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:49:17 -0700 David Ahern wrote:
>> On 11/12/20 6:28 PM, Andrea Mayer wrote:
>>> The implementation of SRv6 End.DT4 differs from the the implementation of SRv6
>>> End.DT6 due to the different *route input* lookup functions. For IPv6 is it
>>> possible to force the routing lookup specifying a routing table through the
>>> ip6_pol_route() function (as it is done in the seg6_lookup_any_nexthop()).
>>
>> It is unfortunate that the IPv6 variant got in without the VRF piece.
> 
> Should we make it a requirement for this series to also extend the v6
> version to support the preferred VRF-based operation? Given VRF is
> better and we require v4 features to be implemented for v6?

I think it is better to separate the two aspects... adding a missing 
feature in IPv4 datapath should not depend on improving the quality of 
the implementation of the IPv6 datapath :-)

I think that Andrea is willing to work on improving the IPv6 
implementation, but this should be considered after this patchset...

my 2c

Stefano

-- 
*******************************************************************
Stefano Salsano
Professore Associato
Dipartimento Ingegneria Elettronica
Universita' di Roma Tor Vergata
Viale Politecnico, 1 - 00133 Roma - ITALY

http://netgroup.uniroma2.it/Stefano_Salsano/

E-mail  : stefano.salsano@...roma2.it
Cell.   : +39 320 4307310
Office  : (Tel.) +39 06 72597770 (Fax.) +39 06 72597435
*******************************************************************