| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 14:01:43 -0800 From: Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com> To: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com> Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>, Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, Rick Jones <rick.jones2@....com> Subject: Re: ipsec impact on performance On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com> wrote: > On (12/02/15 13:44), Tom Herbert wrote: >> > IPv6 would be an interesting academic exercise, but it's going >> > to be a while before we get RDS-TCP to go over IPv6. >> > >> Huh? Who said anything about RDS-TCP? I thought you were trying to >> improve IPsec performance... > > yes, and it would be nice to find out that IPsec for IPv6 is > fast, but I'm afraid there are a lot of IPv4 use cases out there that > need the same thing for IPv4 too (first?). > No, please don't persist is this myopic "we'll get to IPv6 later" model! IPv6 is a real protocol, it has significant deployment of the Internet, and there are now whole data centers that are IPv6 only (e.g. FB), and there are plenty of use cases of IPSEC/IPv6 that could benefit for performance improvements just as much IPv4. This vendor mentality that IPv6 is still not important simply doesn't help matters. :-( Tom -- 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