From: Richard Laing <Richard.Laing@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"jmorris@namei.org" <jmorris@namei.org>,
Martin Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] net/ipv4: Enable flow-based ECMP
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 21:22:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55B7F27E.6040706@alliedtelesis.co.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S36e1rr=4EbD+-FgodWam6KR5034X3jFsYYDTaLKbQF-PA@mail.gmail.com>
On 07/29/2015 09:15 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Richard Laing
>> <Richard.Laing@alliedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:
>>> From: Richard Laing <richard.laing@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
>>>
>>> Enable flow-based ECMP.
>>>
>>> Currently if equal-cost multipath is enabled the kernel chooses between
>>> equal cost paths for each matching packet, essentially packets are
>>> round-robined between the routes. This means that packets from a single
>>> flow can traverse different routes. If one of the routes experiences
>>> congestion this can result in delayed or out of order packets arriving
>>> at the destination.
>>>
>> Richard, someone was complaining to me just last week about the
>> weakness of the round robin algorithm. Thanks for looking into this!
>>
>>> This patch allows packets to be routed based on their
>>> flow - packets in the same flow will always use the same route. This
>>> prevents out of order packets. There are other issues with round-robin
>>> based ECMP routing related to variable path MTU handling and debugging.
>>> See RFC2991 for more details on the problems associated with packet
>>> based ECMP routing.
>>>
> btw, it looks like IPv6 is already doing the hash but is calculating
> it by hand instead of using sk_txhash or skb->hash. It would be nice
> if we could unify this between v4 and v6 at some point to both using
> the existing hashes.
>
> Tom
Thanks Tom, yes IPv6 does work just fine currently. Assuming I get a
version of this patch pushed updating the IPv6 version would seem like a
good option.
--
Richard Laing
Software Team Leader
Allied Telesis Labs| 27 Nazareth Ave | Christchurch 8024 | New Zealand
Phone: +64 3 339 9248
Web: www.alliedtelesis.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-28 21:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-28 2:27 [RFC PATCH 1/1] net/ipv4: Enable flow-based ECMP Richard Laing
2015-07-28 7:20 ` Michal Kubecek
2015-07-28 19:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-07-28 21:16 ` Richard Laing
2015-07-28 21:02 ` Tom Herbert
2015-07-28 21:15 ` Tom Herbert
2015-07-28 21:22 ` Richard Laing [this message]
2015-07-28 21:20 ` Richard Laing
2015-07-29 6:11 ` Michal Kubecek
2015-07-29 6:32 ` David Miller
2015-07-29 16:12 ` Tom Herbert
2015-07-30 1:23 ` Richard Laing
2016-06-17 18:52 ` Jean He
2015-07-29 7:56 ` Julian Anastasov
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=55B7F27E.6040706@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--to=richard.laing@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom@herbertland.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).