From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E8CEC55ABD for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:40:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 239E422242 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:40:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="RDgVcrF2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726301AbgKMTkk (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:40:40 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:55512 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726107AbgKMTkj (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:40:39 -0500 Received: from kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com (unknown [163.114.132.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CFBA32223F; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:40:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1605296439; bh=c5W3Lz4YalL1OgdsvdkC8zm3nZIXvJ8S0cNNaO/k95I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=RDgVcrF2EPWbnoqeTBdHZJI/pmO24hAJYv+vW1tMC/wylTtfEW9lCx9ck4f8tqC8m IMVxZWcIYYTXO8XdYZcHwdlBs2udsQnXhzO4YOqB25kIZSwBCZ0q9O6tOZ1pTuyJ3r a3GPx4OJ0LVvQ1nPpHTmHABjjNJGsXsjX0AlmC5Q= Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:40:36 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: David Ahern Cc: Stefano Salsano , Andrea Mayer , "David S. Miller" , David Ahern , Alexey Kuznetsov , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Shuah Khan , Shrijeet Mukherjee , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Lungaroni , Ahmed Abdelsalam Subject: Re: [net-next,v2,4/5] seg6: add support for the SRv6 End.DT4 behavior Message-ID: <20201113114036.18e40b32@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> In-Reply-To: <09381c96-42a3-91cd-951b-f970cd8e52cb@gmail.com> References: <20201107153139.3552-1-andrea.mayer@uniroma2.it> <20201107153139.3552-5-andrea.mayer@uniroma2.it> <20201110151255.3a86afcc@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20201113022848.dd40aa66763316ac4f4ffd56@uniroma2.it> <34d9b96f-a378-4817-36e8-3d9287c5b76b@gmail.com> <20201113085547.68e04931@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <09381c96-42a3-91cd-951b-f970cd8e52cb@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:04:44 -0700 David Ahern wrote: > On 11/13/20 10:02 AM, Stefano Salsano wrote: > > Il 2020-11-13 17:55, Jakub Kicinski ha scritto: > >> On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:49:17 -0700 David Ahern wrote: > >>> On 11/12/20 6:28 PM, Andrea Mayer wrote: > >>>> The implementation of SRv6 End.DT4 differs from the the > >>>> implementation of SRv6 > >>>> End.DT6 due to the different *route input* lookup functions. For > >>>> IPv6 is it > >>>> possible to force the routing lookup specifying a routing table > >>>> through the > >>>> ip6_pol_route() function (as it is done in the > >>>> seg6_lookup_any_nexthop()). > >>> > >>> It is unfortunate that the IPv6 variant got in without the VRF piece. > >> > >> Should we make it a requirement for this series to also extend the v6 > >> version to support the preferred VRF-based operation? Given VRF is > >> better and we require v4 features to be implemented for v6? > > > > I think it is better to separate the two aspects... adding a missing > > feature in IPv4 datapath should not depend on improving the quality of > > the implementation of the IPv6 datapath :-) > > > > I think that Andrea is willing to work on improving the IPv6 > > implementation, but this should be considered after this patchset... > > agreed. The v6 variant has existed for a while. The v4 version is > independent. Okay, I'm not sure what's the right call so I asked DaveM. TBH I wasn't expecting this reaction, we're talking about a 200 LoC patch which would probably be 90% reused for v6...