From: Fan Du <fan.du@windriver.com>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc: <herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next] {ipv4,xfrm}: Introduce xfrm_tunnel_notifier for xfrm tunnel mode callback
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 16:29:47 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <522057FB.2010306@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130830073801.GH7660@secunet.com>
On 2013年08月30日 15:38, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:09:40PM +0800, Fan Du wrote:
>> Some thoughts on IPv4 VTI implementation:
>>
>> The connection between VTI receiving part and xfrm tunnel mode input process
>> is hardly a "xfrm_tunnel", xfrm_tunnel is used in places where, e.g ipip/sit
>> and xfrm4_tunnel, acts like a true "tunnel" device.
>>
>> In addition, IMHO, VTI doesn't need vti_err to do something meaningful, as all
>> VTI needs is just a notifier to be called whenever xfrm_input ingress a packet
>> to update statistics.
>>
>> A IPsec protected packet is first handled by protocol handlers, e.g AH/ESP,
>> to check packet authentication or encryption rightness. PMTU update is taken
>> care of in this stage by protocol error handler.
>>
>> Then the packet is rearranged properly depending on whether it's transport
>> mode or tunnel mode packed by mode "input" handler. The VTI handler code
>> takes effects in this stage in tunnel mode only. So it neither need propagate
>> PMTU, as it has already been done if necessary, nor the VTI handler is
>> qualified as a xfrm_tunnel.
>>
>> So this patch introduces xfrm_tunnel_notifier and meanwhile wipe out vti_err
>> code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fan Du<fan.du@windriver.com>
>> Cc: Steffen Klassert<steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
>> Cc: David S. Miller<davem@davemloft.net>
>> Reviewed-by: Saurabh Mohan<saurabh.mohan@vyatta.com>
>
> Applied to ipsec-next, thanks a lot!
>
Hi, Steffen
Thanks for picking this up!
About "xfrm: Refactor xfrm_state timer management", Thomas objects adding notifier
at clock_was_set( https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/18/36 ), frankly speaking I'm not
experienced to argue with such high level person, neither could I convince David
that getting rid of wall clock in xfrm_state is the right thing to do.
So I really don't know what to do with this patch now :( scratching my head harder。。。
Is there any slim light of hope for me to keep working on this IPsec issue?
Or should I drop it?
Thanks
--
浮沉随浪只记今朝笑
--fan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-30 8:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-28 7:09 [PATCHv2 net-next] {ipv4,xfrm}: Introduce xfrm_tunnel_notifier for xfrm tunnel mode callback Fan Du
2013-08-30 7:38 ` Steffen Klassert
2013-08-30 8:29 ` Fan Du [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=522057FB.2010306@windriver.com \
--to=fan.du@windriver.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
/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).