netdev - Re: [RFC v4] Add TCP encap

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:	Tue, 24 Apr 2012 14:42:23 +0900
From:	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen.hemminger@...tta.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jhs@...atatu.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, dev@...nvswitch.org,
	eric dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Kyle Mestery <kmestery@...co.com>,
	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v4] Add TCP encap_rcv hook (repost)

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 09:40:57PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 03:59:24PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 02:38:07PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM, David Miller
> > > >> <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > > >> > 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.
> > > >>
> > > >> Ahh, yes, that I agree with.  Independent of this, there's work
> > > >> being
> > > >> done to make it so that OVS can use the normal in-tree tunneling
> > > >> code
> > > >> and not need its own.  Once that's done I expect that STT will
> > > >> follow
> > > >> the same model.
> > > >
> > > > Hi Jesse,
> > > >
> > > > I am wondering how firm the plans to on allowing OVS to use
> > > > in-tree tunnel
> > > > code are. I'm happy to move my efforts over to an in-tree STT
> > > > implementation
> > > > but ultimately I would like to get STT running in conjunction
> > > > with OVS.
> > > 
> > > I would say that it's a firm goal but the implementation probably
> > > still has a ways to go.  Kyle Mestery (CC'ed) has volunteered to
> > > work
> > > on this in support of adding VXLAN, which needs some additional
> > > flexibility that this approach would also provide.  You might want
> > > to
> > > talk to him to see if there are ways that you guys can work
> > > together
> > > on it if you are interested.  Having better integration with
> > > upstream
> > > tunneling is definitely a step that OVS needs to make and sooner
> > > would
> > > be better than later.
> > 
> > Hi Jesse, Hi Kyle,
> > 
> > that sounds like an excellent plan.
> > 
> > Kyle, do you have any thoughts on how we might best work together on
> > this?
> > Perhaps there are some patches floating around that I could take a
> > look at?
> 
> ChrisW had a start to VxVlan tunnel (non OVS), and I promised to work on
> finishing

Thanks. I guess that I might be able to base parts of an STT implementation
on that work.

I'd like to use an STT implementation with OVS, so in-tree tunnel support
for OVS is also important to me.

--
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