[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160510173128.GA32285@salvia>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 19:31:28 +0200
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
laforge@...monks.org, aschultz@...p.net, openbsc@...ts.osmocom.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH nf-next,v2] gtp: add initial driver for datapath of GPRS
Tunneling Protocol (GTP-U)
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:16:33AM -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:27 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
> > Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 00:55:48 +0200
> >
> >> This is an initial implementation of a netdev driver for GTP datapath
> >> (GTP-U) v0 and v1, according to the GSM TS 09.60 and 3GPP TS 29.060
> >> standards. This tunneling protocol is used to prevent subscribers from
> >> accessing mobile carrier core network infrastructure.
> >>
> >> This implementation requires a GGSN userspace daemon that implements the
> >> signaling protocol (GTP-C), such as OpenGGSN [1]. This userspace daemon
> >> updates the PDP context database that represents active subscriber
> >> sessions through a genetlink interface.
> >>
> >> For more context on this tunneling protocol, you can check the slides
> >> that were presented during the NetDev 1.1 [2].
> >>
> >> Only IPv4 is supported at this time.
> >>
>
> Is there a timeline for adding IPv6 support?
There is a preliminary kernel patch to add IPv6 that seems to be
untested yet, I can share it with you or anyone else want to have a
look. Specifically, there are missing bits on the netlink side of the
PDP context database to support SGSN and MS IPv6 address, but that
shouldn't be much of a problem.
On the userspace side, the userspace daemon OpenGGSN still doesn't
support IPv6. Adding IPv6 support to this daemon is a bit of a PITA,
several people using it in production told me that the daemon runs
stable for production, but from a developer perspective the current
codebase look not easy to extend (quite many stuff very IPv4 specific,
I already spend time trying to refactor it two years ago to prepare
this support). Meanwhile, this triggered a new daemon daemon
implementation osmo-ggsn to replace it, I posted a proof-of-concept on
the openbsc mailing list, but nobody jumped on this to support this
development effort so far.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists