From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AD2E2882CD for ; Mon, 3 Nov 2025 16:36:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762187790; cv=none; b=Q9iS2i6GIizZ1GYnRiw0Np6QlZ58SmskertwYOHzSBzCD1ImkJrApwKf1SZE31GjbVsl1I3Zo0zKld5KKesjpshcMH0esPMUzUesMqkH+frCYS7pfv1JZMONXLyHuyd+lQ/zNTSHM5DCbABtH5Yd6LktAlrFlOuSBg9M8V1ygr0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762187790; c=relaxed/simple; bh=FTbSdzcSfjDJWHrsY5GU1K2IiMzNNS7l/cCl68pOHd4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=DlI0ViVfb4+gAjYlGCdP9q2HecN/OGo9OQpo31qnR6Hov8KBZ5YfT4Be/MjZtWFr7LMVMqrg/Pw9gNuqa418g1q5GZ49LWimd71XTUQm9L+UHOKCuFocpynp8ba6ra5N6htAWMILSXVQGL4KOOIIv9D8UcfzoMDZX43+Yj5ly/M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=GIC5g0RX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="GIC5g0RX" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92983C4CEE7; Mon, 3 Nov 2025 16:36:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1762187789; bh=FTbSdzcSfjDJWHrsY5GU1K2IiMzNNS7l/cCl68pOHd4=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=GIC5g0RXCXSEw7hsS2S+OoLSy92oGDK3YuCVyPZClm+41oeeHgdR83lBP+sMHvSPy izhR+W0EBxbkITYrMKGVCt8f+8b2YrcSVkUh8JGUgqQO8EY/zV5pO22/lik6titcvb jqqvUjNpFP9yYug5Cz941MIxB8iLXs+RLWuN2lPGSND7eBkehX2N2NnqJ6KcxMA8F4 Bn3d3uMH7Fu7+8ZHkKjoWaRHUBCrbQcHRHRZhu3WTleNdALKco3BiHXNgLsW5Dcf+e 9rNoO9nfswwr3EyiqFDEsupGxIsI+0rHPG0zAP1YR1k4+kSHcWKl9crSjKeogKyvVA v+ZMp6mCygI9g== Message-ID: Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 09:36:28 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2-next] ip-xfrm: add pcpu-num support Content-Language: en-US To: Sabrina Dubroca Cc: Stephen Hemminger , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Steffen Klassert References: <2623d62913de4f0e5e1d6a8b8cbcab4a9508c324.1761735750.git.sd@queasysnail.net> <20251030090615.28552eeb@phoenix> From: David Ahern In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/3/25 2:48 AM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > 2025-10-30, 19:32:10 -0600, David Ahern wrote: >> On 10/30/25 5:51 PM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: >>> With the netlink specs project, it's also maybe less attractive? >>> (netlink spec for ipsec is also on my todo list and I've given >>> it a look, ipxfrm conversion is probably easier) >>> >> >> That is an interesting question. I guess it depends on the long term >> expectations for the tooling. There is a lot to like about the specs. >> Does Red Hat include the commands in recent RHEL releases? ie., do we >> know of it gaining traction in the more "popular" OS releases? > > Yes, it's present in the latest RHEL release and recent Fedoras. > (no idea what Debian and Ubuntu do) > That's a start. From there we need to figure out adoption rate. The legacy arp and ifconfig tools are still widely used despite requests to move to ip meaning habits are to break. I would give the netlink spec priority.