[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120423.170817.1103719420692884446.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 17:08:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: jesse@...ira.com
Cc: shemminger@...tta.com, horms@...ge.net.au, jhs@...atatu.com,
stephen.hemminger@...tta.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
dev@...nvswitch.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v4] Add TCP encap_rcv hook (repost)
From: Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:53:42 -0700
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> From: Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
>> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:08:49 -0700
>>
>>> Assuming that the TCP stack generates large TSO frames on transmit
>>> (which could be the local stack; something sent by a VM; or packets
>>> received, coalesced by GRO and then encapsulated by STT) then you can
>>> just prepend the STT header (possibly slightly adjusting things like
>>> requested MSS, number of segments, etc. slightly). After that it's
>>> possible to just output the resulting frame through the IP stack like
>>> all tunnels do today.
>>
>> Which seems to potentially suggest a stronger intergration of the STT
>> tunnel transmit path into our IP stack rather than the approach Simon
>> is taking
>
> Did you have something in mind?
A normal bonafide tunnel netdevice driver like GRE instead of the
openvswitch approach Simon is using.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists