[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170206135109.sw5p2yb7cbsa3g37@nataraja>
Date:   Mon, 6 Feb 2017 14:51:09 +0100
From:   Harald Welte <laforge@...filter.org>
To:     Andreas Schultz <aschultz@...p.net>
Cc:     Pablo Neira <pablo@...filter.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Lionel Gauthier <Lionel.Gauthier@...ecom.fr>,
        openbsc@...ts.osmocom.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/6] gtp: make GTP sockets in gtp_newlink
 optional
Hi Andreas,
my kernel coding skills are getting a bit rusty (no pun intended), and
I'll think others on this list are more capable to do so.  But let me at
least provide feedback from the "3GPP / GTP side":
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 05:37:08PM +0100, Andreas Schultz wrote:
> Having both GTPv0-U and GTPv1-U is not always desirable.
> Fallback from GTPv1-U to GTPv0-U was depreciated from 3GPP
> Rel-8 onwards. Post Rel-8 implementation are discuraged
> from listening on the v0 port (see 3GPP TS 29.281, Sect. 1).
I confirm this and I think the related change should be applied.
> A future change will completely decouple the sockets from the
> network device. Till then, at least one of the sockets needs to
> be specified (either v0 or v1), the other is optional.
Makes sense.
-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@...filter.org>                 http://netfilter.org/
============================================================================
  "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
   architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going
   on while IP was being designed."                    -- Paul Vixie
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
