[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240619201959.GA1513@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 22:19:59 +0200
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Cc: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@....org>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, dev@...nvswitch.org,
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, kuba@...nel.org,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
Aaron Conole <aconole@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] openvswitch: set IPS_CONFIRMED in tmpl
status only when commit is set in conntrack
Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com> wrote:
> > master connection only if it is not yet confirmed. Users may commit different
> > labels for the related connection. This should be more in line with the
> > previous behavior.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> You're right.
> Also, I noticed the related ct->mark is set to master ct->mark in
> init_conntrack() as well as secmark when creating the related ct.
>
> Hi, Florian,
>
> Any reason why the labels are not set to master ct's in there?
The intent was to have lables be set only via ctnetlink (userspace)
or ruleset.
The original use case was for tagging connections based on
observed behaviour/properties at a later time, not at start of flow.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists