netdev - Re: [RFC 4/9] ipv6: sr: add support for SRH encapsulation and injection with lwtunnels

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: <57C44C38.4010203@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Aug 2016 07:52:40 -0700
From:   Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     David Lebrun <david.lebrun@...ouvain.be>
CC:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/9] ipv6: sr: add support for SRH encapsulation and injection
 with lwtunnels

On 8/26/16, 8:52 AM, David Lebrun wrote:
> This patch creates a new type of interfaceless lightweight tunnel (SEG6),
> enabling the encapsulation and injection of SRH within locally emitted
> packets and forwarded packets.
>
> From a configuration viewpoint, a seg6 tunnel would be configured as follows:
>
>   ip -6 ro ad fc00::1/128 via <gw> encap seg6 mode encap segs fc42::1,fc42::2,fc42::3
>
> Any packet whose destination address is fc00::1 would thus be encapsulated
> within an outer IPv6 header containing the SRH with three segments, and would
> actually be routed to the first segment of the list. If `mode inline' was
> specified instead of `mode encap', then the SRH would be directly inserted
> after the IPv6 header without outer encapsulation.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Lebrun <david.lebrun@...ouvain.be>
> ---

You will need to account for lwtunnel headroom ?
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/662632/

thanks,
Roopa