[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131205161544.GS1258@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 00:15:44 +0800
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc: Christophe Gouault <christophe.gouault@...nd.com>,
network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Saurabh Mohan <saurabh.mohan@...tta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vti: remove GRE_KEY flag for vti tunnel
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 11:51:43AM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 05:47:08PM +0800, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 09:47:27AM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > >
> > > I've already metntioned that I'am a bit disappointed on how the gre
> > > keys and flags are used with vti. But I fear we need to keep it
> > > as it is for now, because it would at least change the behaviour
> > > of iproute2 if we remove the flags.
> >
> > I submit this patch just beacuse iproute2 will return fail when we modify vti
> > parameters. Code here
> >
> > ip/iptunnel.c#L226:
> > if (p->iph.protocol == IPPROTO_IPIP || p->iph.protocol == IPPROTO_IPV6) {
> > if ((p->i_flags & GRE_KEY) || (p->o_flags & GRE_KEY)) {
> > fprintf(stderr, "Keys are not allowed with ipip and sit tunnels\n");
> > return -1;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > So should we modify iproute2 or kernel code?
>
> Update iproute2 to allow GRE_KEY if the VTI_ISVTI flag is set.
OK, I will resubmit a patch for iproute2
>
> The handling of vti keys inside the kernel needs to be redesigned too,
> but this requires a concept such that the existing userspace API still
> works.
--
Thanks & Best Regards
Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
--
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