From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Subject: Re: openvswitch/flow WAS ( Re: [rfc] Merging the Open vSwitch datapath Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 16:56:18 +0200 Message-ID: <20101019145618.GF6193@verge.net.au> References: <20100830062755.GA22396@verge.net.au> <87k4n8ow1r.fsf@benpfaff.org> <1287142292.3642.19.camel@bigi> <1287228959.3664.72.camel@bigi> <1287404217.3664.182.camel@bigi> <20101018152010.GE319@verge.net.au> <1287483768.26671.2.camel@bigi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jesse Gross , Ben Pfaff , netdev@vger.kernel.org, ovs-team@nicira.com To: jamal Return-path: Received: from kirsty.vergenet.net ([202.4.237.240]:49024 "EHLO kirsty.vergenet.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752486Ab0JSOzs (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:55:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1287483768.26671.2.camel@bigi> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 06:22:48AM -0400, jamal wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 17:20 +0200, Simon Horman wrote: > > > As I understand things, the packet goes from the kernel to userspace > > and then (typically) comes back again. > > Injection back is trivial. > > > I guess that it would be possible to send a copy of the headers > > to user-sapce while the packet is quarantined in the kernel pending > > a response from user-space. I say only the headers, as typically > > that is all user-space needs to make a decision, though I guess it > > may need the body to make some types of decisions. I have no idea > > if such a scheme would be desirable in any circumstances. > > quarantine the packet in the kernel would be trickier than sending the > whole thing up - for a sample of how it is done i believe the netfilter > approach (ipq?) as well as ipsec would be good samples to look at. Ok, lets forget my quarantine idea - I was just thinking aloud.