netdev - Re: [patch v4, kernel version 3.2.1] net/ipv4/ip

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CAA93jw5Juvb91wWt8=KbrxAW7nOdAUX82q+syMwv-+XJwgeSwA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jan 2012 00:18:37 +0100
From:	Dave Taht <dave.taht@...il.com>
To:	Štefan Gula <steweg@...t.sk>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jesse@...ira.com,
	joseph.glanville@...onvm.com.au, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch v4, kernel version 3.2.1] net/ipv4/ip_gre: Ethernet
 multipoint GRE over IP

2012/1/25 Štefan Gula <steweg@...t.sk>:
> 2012/1/25 David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>:
>> From: Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
>> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 23:11:06 -0800
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>>> From: Joseph Glanville <joseph.glanville@...onvm.com.au>
>>>> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:48:37 +1100
>>>>
>>>>> The reason why this patch is useful is that it stands to be the only
>>>>> true mulitpoint L2 VPN with a kernel space forwarding plane.
>>>>
>>>> So what you're telling me is that I added this huge openvswitch
>>>> thing essentially for nothing?
>>>
>>> I think it's actually the opposite - Open vSwitch can be used to
>>> implement this type of thing as well as for many other use cases.
>>
>> Then openvswitch is exactly where you should be prototyping and
>> implementing support for this sort of stuff.
>>
>> And only if you cannot obtain reasonable performance using openvswitch
>> should you be even entertaining the notion of a static implementation.
>>
>> That's the whole premise behind putting openvswitch into the tree, so
>> that guys like you can play around in userspace without having to make
>> any kernel changes at all.
>>
>> I am not applying these patches, the more things you say the more I am
>> convinced they are not appropriate.
>>
> The performance is one of the most critical thing why I have chosen to
> build kernel patch in the first place instead of some user-space app.

I am very interested in testing this patch, for the kinds of environments
I care about (embedded, cpe, etc)

but I won't be able to get around to it for a week or so.

I found the overall simplicity of this approach vs the
complexity of the alternatives, appealing, and the
performance numbers also.

-- 
Dave Täht
SKYPE: davetaht
US Tel: 1-239-829-5608
FR Tel: 0638645374
http://www.bufferbloat.net
--
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