From: James Huang <jamesclhuang@gmail.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: LRO restructuring?
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:25:49 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <loom.20090218T192451-89@post.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20080812015321.GA19011@gondor.apana.org.au
Hi Herbert,
Any idea when this LRO restructuring work will be done?
Making LRO available even when ip forwarding is enabled will significantly
improve performace of network appliances in the data path.
I have some questions on this:
(1) Based on the emails in this thread, I suppose you are going to keep the
original length of each segment you coalesced into the big packet and use that
info to segment the big packet on the output path. In case the packet was
modified by an appliance in the path and the total length is changed (e.g. NAT
on ftp control packets), should the corresponding segment length info also get
updated? This same question also applies to the checksums.
(2) Do you make sure all of the segments to be coalesced have the same DF bit?
(3) I think bridged packets should not be LROed. Whether a packet is bridged
or not can be based on the L2 MAC destination address. Is this how it is done?
(4) Does LRO work only for IPv4? Any plan to extend it to support IPv6?
Thanks,
James Huang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-18 19:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-11 13:30 LRO restructuring? Andrew Gallatin
2008-08-11 21:03 ` David Miller
2008-08-12 11:50 ` Andrew Gallatin
2008-08-13 2:14 ` Herbert Xu
2008-08-12 0:50 ` Herbert Xu
2008-08-12 0:54 ` David Miller
2008-08-12 1:00 ` Herbert Xu
2008-08-12 1:30 ` Rick Jones
2008-08-12 1:39 ` David Miller
2008-08-12 1:53 ` Herbert Xu
2009-02-18 19:25 ` James Huang [this message]
2009-02-18 19:42 ` Ben Hutchings
2009-02-18 19:46 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-19 13:53 ` Herbert Xu
2009-02-19 22:20 ` James Huang
[not found] ` <f0ed9b110902191417k2917d856q9098b304eeb7435b@mail.gmail.com>
2009-02-20 0:37 ` Herbert Xu
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=loom.20090218T192451-89@post.gmane.org \
--to=jamesclhuang@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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).