[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230714184013.GJ41919@unreal>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 21:40:13 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 09/12] net/mlx5: Compare with old_dest param to
modify rule destination
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 08:17:27PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 21:58:33 +0300 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > TC packet rewrites or IPsec comes first?
> >
> > In theory, we support any order, but in real life I don't think that TC
> > before IPsec is really valuable.
>
> I asked the question poorly. To clearer, you're saying that:
>
> a) host <-> TC <-> IPsec <-> "wire"/switch
> or
> b) host <-> IPsec <-> TC <-> "wire"/switch
>
> ?
It depends on configuration order, if user configures TC first, it will
be a), if he/she configures IPsec first, it will be b).
I just think that option b) is really matters.
Thanks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists