netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


      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).