[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <EC95E629-CB0D-463A-99B3-5C474D4DD3F3@fh-muenster.de>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 13:38:38 +0200
From: Michael Tuexen <tuexen@...muenster.de>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Cc: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
davem <davem@...emloft.net>, Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 net-next 16/16] sctp: enable udp tunneling socks
`On 22. Oct 2020, at 05:12, Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 5:13 PM Michael Tuexen <tuexen@...muenster.de> wrote:
>>
>>> On 21. Oct 2020, at 06:16, Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 5:23 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
>>> <marcelo.leitner@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:15:26PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>>>>>> On 20. Oct 2020, at 23:11, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 05:12:06PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 6:15 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
>>>>>>> <marcelo.leitner@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 08:25:33PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>>>>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst
>>>>>>>>> @@ -2640,6 +2640,12 @@ addr_scope_policy - INTEGER
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Default: 1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +udp_port - INTEGER
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Need to be more verbose here, and also mention the RFC.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> + The listening port for the local UDP tunneling sock.
>>>>>>>> , shared by all applications in the same net namespace.
>>>>>>>>> + UDP encapsulation will be disabled when it's set to 0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Note, however, that setting just this is not enough to actually
>>>>>>>> use it. ..."
>>>>>>> When it's a client, yes, but when it's a server, the encap_port can
>>>>>>> be got from the incoming packet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> + Default: 9899
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> encap_port - INTEGER
>>>>>>>>> The default remote UDP encapsalution port.
>>>>>>>>> When UDP tunneling is enabled, this global value is used to set
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When is it enabled, which conditions are needed? Maybe it can be
>>>>>>>> explained only in the one above.
>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>> pls check if this one will be better:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is. Verbose enough now, thx.
>>>>>> (one other comment below)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> udp_port - INTEGER
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The listening port for the local UDP tunneling sock.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This UDP sock is used for processing the incoming UDP-encapsulated
>>>>>>> SCTP packets (from RFC6951), and shared by all applications in the
>>>>>>> same net namespace. This UDP sock will be closed when the value is
>>>>>>> set to 0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The value will also be used to set the src port of the UDP header
>>>>>>> for the outgoing UDP-encapsulated SCTP packets. For the dest port,
>>>>>>> please refer to 'encap_port' below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Default: 9899
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm now wondering if this is the right default. I mean, it is the
>>>>>> standard port for it, yes, but at the same time, it means loading SCTP
>>>>>> module will steal/use that UDP port on all net namespaces and can lead
>>>>>> to conflicts with other apps. A more conservative approach here is to
>>>>>> document the standard port, but set the default to 0 and require the
>>>>>> user to set it in if it is expected to be used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did FreeBSD enable it by default too?
>>>>> No. The default is 0, which means that the encapsulation is turned off.
>>>>> Setting this sysctl variable to a non-zero value enables the UDP tunneling
>>>>> with the given port.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Michael.
>>>> Xin, then we should change this default value (and update the
>>>> documentation above accordingly, to still have the standard port #
>>>> readily available in there).
>>> OK, I misunderstood the RFC.
>> Does that RFC mandate that the feature is on by default? Can you point me to
>> that text?
> Not really.
>
> I was thinking that by leaving it to 9899 by default users don't need to
> know the port when want to use it, and yet I didn't want to add another
> sysctl member. :D
OK. Thanks for letting me know.
Best regards
Michael
>
>>
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>>>
>>> I will remove the call to sctp_udp_sock_start/stop() from
>>> sctp_ctrlsock_init/exit(), and set the udp_port as 0 by default.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5257 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists