[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <28e37d43-9581-d84b-ebae-fdea8ee02242@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2018 08:52:26 -0700
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Mike Manning <mmanning@...tta.att-mail.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 0/9] vrf: allow simultaneous service instances
in default and other VRFs
On 11/2/18 1:10 PM, Mike Manning wrote:
> Services currently have to be VRF-aware if they are using an unbound
> socket. One cannot have multiple service instances running in the
> default and other VRFs for services that are not VRF-aware and listen
> on an unbound socket. This is because there is no easy way of isolating
> packets received in the default VRF from those arriving in other VRFs.
>
> This series provides this isolation for stream sockets subject to the
> existing kernel parameter net.ipv4.tcp_l3mdev_accept not being set,
> given that this is documented as allowing a single service instance to
> work across all VRF domains. Similarly, net.ipv4.udp_l3mdev_accept is
> checked for datagram sockets, and net.ipv4.raw_l3mdev_accept is
> introduced for raw sockets. The functionality applies to UDP & TCP
> services as well as those using raw sockets, and is for IPv4 and IPv6.
>
> Example of running ssh instances in default and blue VRF:
>
> $ /usr/sbin/sshd -D
> $ ip vrf exec vrf-blue /usr/sbin/sshd
> $ ss -ta | egrep 'State|ssh'
> State Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address:Port Peer Address:Port
> LISTEN 0 128 0.0.0.0%vrf-blue:ssh 0.0.0.0:*
> LISTEN 0 128 0.0.0.0:ssh 0.0.0.0:*
> ESTAB 0 0 192.168.122.220:ssh 192.168.122.1:50282
> LISTEN 0 128 [::]%vrf-blue:ssh [::]:*
> LISTEN 0 128 [::]:ssh [::]:*
> ESTAB 0 0 [3000::2]%vrf-blue:ssh [3000::9]:45896
> ESTAB 0 0 [2000::2]:ssh [2000::9]:46398
>
DaveM:
I will take a look at this set the early part of this week. I just need
a few days. Thanks,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists