dev.dpdk.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>,
	"Drost, MariuszX" <mariuszx.drost@intel.com>,
	"Nicolau, Radu" <radu.nicolau@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Lukasz Bartosik <lbartosik@marvell.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix SAD selection logic
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 10:20:37 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801A8C696A3@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VE1PR04MB6639EE614E1BC8EB10D61701E6930@VE1PR04MB6639.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>


> 
> >
> > Ok, so to confirm:
> > Your only issue here is that patch is that we have to split ipsec-secgw SADB into
> > two?
> >
> > No objections to other part:
> > - search for given SPI value across both SPDs (IPv4 and IPv6)
> >  - for each positive result create a new SA.
> > So if we have same SPI in both IPv4 and IPv6 SPDs instead of one SA that
> > would be referred by both SPD tables (current situation),
> > we will create 2 independent SAs - one for IPv4, second for IPv6.
> > For each one a separate rte_security/crypto session will be created and
> > programmed.
> > ?
> >
> > Because, I think that part will still be needed even when will have new SAD in
> > place.
> Agreed.

Ok, then let's postpone this patch till new SAD will be in ipsec-secgw.
Konstantin

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-16 10:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-05 12:35 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] fix SAD selection logic Mariusz Drost
2019-09-05 12:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: " Mariusz Drost
2019-09-05 12:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: tests for split SAD Mariusz Drost
2019-09-24 10:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] fix SAD selection logic Mariusz Drost
2019-09-24 10:35   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: " Mariusz Drost
2019-09-24 12:18     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-02 15:43     ` Nicolau, Radu
2019-10-10 13:43     ` Akhil Goyal
2019-10-11 13:24       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-11 14:02         ` Akhil Goyal
2019-10-11 16:38           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-10-15 13:53             ` Akhil Goyal
2019-10-16 10:20               ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message]
2019-09-24 10:35   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: tests for split SAD Mariusz Drost
2019-09-24 12:47     ` Ananyev, Konstantin

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=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801A8C696A3@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=lbartosik@marvell.com \
    --cc=mariuszx.drost@intel.com \
    --cc=radu.nicolau@intel.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).