From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Harald Welte Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/6] gtp: make GTP sockets in gtp_newlink optional Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 14:51:09 +0100 Message-ID: <20170206135109.sw5p2yb7cbsa3g37@nataraja> References: <20170130163713.17524-1-aschultz@tpip.net> <20170130163713.17524-2-aschultz@tpip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Pablo Neira , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Lionel Gauthier , openbsc@lists.osmocom.org To: Andreas Schultz Return-path: Received: from ganesha.gnumonks.org ([213.95.27.120]:58537 "EHLO ganesha.gnumonks.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753257AbdBFOEj (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2017 09:04:39 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170130163713.17524-2-aschultz@tpip.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Andreas, my kernel coding skills are getting a bit rusty (no pun intended), and I'll think others on this list are more capable to do so. But let me at least provide feedback from the "3GPP / GTP side": On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 05:37:08PM +0100, Andreas Schultz wrote: > Having both GTPv0-U and GTPv1-U is not always desirable. > Fallback from GTPv1-U to GTPv0-U was depreciated from 3GPP > Rel-8 onwards. Post Rel-8 implementation are discuraged > from listening on the v0 port (see 3GPP TS 29.281, Sect. 1). I confirm this and I think the related change should be applied. > A future change will completely decouple the sockets from the > network device. Till then, at least one of the sockets needs to > be specified (either v0 or v1), the other is optional. Makes sense. -- - Harald Welte http://netfilter.org/ ============================================================================ "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going on while IP was being designed." -- Paul Vixie