netdev - Re: RFC - VXLAN port range facility

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]

Message-ID: <OF9DE1CF50.DAF9EEF0-ON85257B7C.0043CE0A-85257B7C.0044520B@us.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 31 May 2013 08:26:14 -0400
From:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
To:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: RFC - VXLAN port range facility

Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com> wrote on 05/31/2013 02:09:34 AM:

> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:00 AM, David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com> 
wrote:
> > But I don't think there's particular advantage in splitting it up 
30,000
> > ways when 10 ways would be both practical, for binding, and spread
> > traffic to 10 flows potentially.
> 
> Most people that run large data centers think that 16 bits of entropy
> is barely sufficient. The issue is not CPUs or link aggregation but
> Clos fabrics built using ECMP.
> 

And most people running embedded systems wouldn't want to bind to
30,000 sockets by default, which is the proper way for VXLAN to
interact with UDP.

A casual user of VXLAN between a couple of small machines on ordinary
Ethernet generally won't require multiple ports at all.

I think the default case should lean towards the low end, and the
mechanisms are there to tune the high end.

                                                        +-DLS

--
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