From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2/net-next 7/7] tc: flower: Support matching on ND Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 08:50:52 -0800 Message-ID: <20170207085052.15fdc3ff@xeon-e3> References: <1486031920-10784-1-git-send-email-simon.horman@netronome.com> <1486031920-10784-8-git-send-email-simon.horman@netronome.com> <20170202172748.GE1845@nanopsycho.orion> <20170206084359.GA20384@penelope.horms.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jiri Pirko , Dinan Gunawardena , netdev@vger.kernel.org, oss-drivers@netronome.com To: Simon Horman Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f182.google.com ([209.85.192.182]:35189 "EHLO mail-pf0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751820AbdBGQvA (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:51:00 -0500 Received: by mail-pf0-f182.google.com with SMTP id f144so34423377pfa.2 for ; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 08:51:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20170206084359.GA20384@penelope.horms.nl> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 09:44:00 +0100 Simon Horman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 06:27:48PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > > Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 11:38:40AM CET, simon.horman@netronome.com wrote: > > >Allow matching on Neighbour Discovery target IP, and source and > > >destination link-layer addresses for neighbour solicitation and > > >advertisement messages. > > > > > >Sample usage: > > > > > >tc qdisc add dev eth0 ingress > > > > > >tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ipv6 parent ffff: flower \ > > > indev eth0 ip_proto icmpv6 type 136 code 0 \ > > > nd_target 2001:470:7eb3:403:201:8eff:fe22:8fea \ > > > nd_tll 00:01:8e:22:8f:ea action drop > > > > > >Signed-off-by: Simon Horman > > > > > > Why you are adding this to iproute2? You only poster RFC for kernel. > > > > Please push to kernel first, let it merge, then send iproute2 support. > > Hi Jiri, > > I think there is a value in making the user-space code available in > parallel with the kernel changes to allow testing and so by any interested > parties. The problem is that the ABI is not defined until it makes it into upstream kernel tree. If a set of developers needs tools, then they can keep a temporary fork (which is what the CAKE developers are doing). > If this is not acceptable I'm happy to stop doing so. But in my ideal world > I'd be very happy to see other TC kernel updates accompanied by > implementations their user-space tool counterparts. If you want something in right away resend those patches.