From: Masahide NAKAMURA <nakam@linux-ipv6.org>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] [XFRM]: Restrict upper layer information by bundle.
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 01:30:21 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070501011930.AC41.NAKAM@linux-ipv6.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070430.003437.57159715.davem@davemloft.net>
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 00:34:37 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Masahide NAKAMURA <nakam@linux-ipv6.org>
> Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 16:25:39 +0900
>
> > On MIPv6 usage, XFRM sub policy is enabled.
> > When main (IPsec) and sub (MIPv6) policy selectors have the same
> > address set but different upper layer information (i.e. protocol
> > number and its ports or type/code), multiple bundle should be created.
> > However, currently we have issue to use the same bundle created for
> > the first time with all flows covered by the case.
> >
> > It is useful for the bundle to have the upper layer information
> > to be restructured correctly if it does not match with the flow.
> >
> > 1. Bundle was created by two policies
> > Selector from another policy is added to xfrm_dst.
> > If the flow does not match the selector, it goes to slow path to
> > restructure new bundle by single policy.
> >
> > 2. Bundle was created by one policy
> > Flow cache is added to xfrm_dst as originated one. If the flow does
> > not match the cache, it goes to slow path to try searching another
> > policy.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Masahide NAKAMURA <nakam@linux-ipv6.org>
>
> This is an OK solution for the problem for now.
>
> My senses tell me that there is probably some cleaner way to
> handle this problem. If you come up with a better idea for it,
> please feel free to bounce your ideas to me.
I get it. It is added to my TODOs to find another way (which may include
design level change) to achive it.
Thank you,
--
Masahide NAKAMURA
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-30 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-06 7:25 [RFC] [PATCH] [XFRM]: Restrict upper layer information by bundle Masahide NAKAMURA
2007-04-12 5:42 ` Masahide NAKAMURA
2007-04-12 6:24 ` David Miller
2007-04-12 6:53 ` Masahide NAKAMURA
2007-04-30 4:36 ` Masahide NAKAMURA
2007-04-30 5:21 ` David Miller
2007-04-30 16:30 ` Masahide NAKAMURA
2007-04-30 7:34 ` David Miller
2007-04-30 16:30 ` Masahide NAKAMURA [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=20070501011930.AC41.NAKAM@linux-ipv6.org \
--to=nakam@linux-ipv6.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).