netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 1/3] vxlan: vxlan_vs_find_vni(): Find vxlan_dev according to vni and remote

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z6NZJ7R+TdruVSmM@t-dallas>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 20:27:19 +0800
From: Ted Chen <znscnchen@...il.com>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 1/3] vxlan: vxlan_vs_find_vni(): Find
 vxlan_dev according to vni and remote_ip

On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 04:16:05PM +0200, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 09:09:02PM +0800, Ted Chen wrote:
> > I didn't see target addresses were appended into the FDB when an unicast
> > remote_ip had been configured.
> > 
> > e.g.
> > Usually when (2)(3) are invoked, (1) is not called to configure a unicast
> > remote_ip to the VTEP (though it's allowed to call (1)).
> > 
> > (1) ip link add vxlan42 type vxlan id 42 \
> >                 local 10.0.0.1 remote 10.0.0.2 dstport 4789
> > (2) bridge fdb append to 00:00:00:00:00:00 dst 10.0.0.3 dev vxlan42
> > (3) bridge fdb append to 00:00:00:00:00:00 dst 10.0.0.4 dev vxlan42
> > 
> > So, this patch just leverages the case when remote_ip is configured in the
> > VTEP to stand for P2P.
> > 
> > Do you think there's a better way to identify P2P more precisely?
> 
> I think it will require a new uAPI (e.g., a new VXLAN netlink attribute)
> as it's a behavior change, but I really prefer not to go there when the
> problem can be solved in other ways (e.g., the tc solution I mentioned
> or using multiple VNIs).
I tried that the mentioned tc solution functions well in my required case.
Thanks a lot!!