From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: "Peter Nørlund" <pch@ordbogen.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ipv4: add hash-based multipath routing
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 09:34:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150413093446.438bca5e@urahara> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150412205430.6d7fcd30@tyr>
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 20:54:30 +0200
Peter Nørlund <pch@ordbogen.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm working on adding L3/L4 hash-based IPv4 multipath to the kernel,
> but I wonder what the best approach for the mainline kernel is.
>
> When the IPv6 multipath code was added, choosing the routing algorithm
> by means of compile-time config or sysctl was rejected, so I assume
> that we want to revive the RTA_MP_ALGO or a new attribute?
>
> The IPv6 multipath uses L4 balancing - which is fine for IPv6 where
> fragmentation does not happend - but in my opinion the safest default
> for IPv4 is L3, especially when multipath is used together with anycast.
>
> My main problem is the existing multipath code which is really old
> (linux 2.1.66). From the looks of it, it attempts to be somewhat random,
> but in reality it is more or less weighted round-robin, and as far as I
> can tell it even has an off-by-one error in its handling of the random
> value. I think it is wise to support L3, L4, and per-packet
> load-balancing, just like the hardware vendors, but must the per-packet
> load-balancing be default, or is it okay to change the default
> behavior? Also, would a weighted round-robin with a single per-cpu
> counter suffice? This would get rid of the spinlock and avoid causing
> cache invalidations of the route info with each packet. But it would not
> be true round-robin, which would require a per-route-info counter. If
> we are promising round-robin it is bad, but if we are simply promising
> weighted per-packet load-balancing, it's a different matter.
We (Brocade) did some work on this, but it never was done enough to
submit upstream. The ideal is to allow configuring choice of algorithm
per-route.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-13 16:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-12 18:54 ipv4: add hash-based multipath routing Peter Nørlund
2015-04-13 16:34 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150413093446.438bca5e@urahara \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pch@ordbogen.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.