From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:41:37 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net-next 00/16] sctp: Implement RFC6951: UDP Encapsulation of SCTP Message-Id: <20201015124137.GA11030@localhost.localdomain> List-Id: References: <20201014203416.6e0a1604@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> In-Reply-To: <20201014203416.6e0a1604@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Xin Long , network dev , linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman , Michael Tuexen , davem@davemloft.net, gnault@redhat.com, pabeni@redhat.com, willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 08:34:16PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 15:27:25 +0800 Xin Long wrote: > > Description From the RFC: > > > > The Main Reasons: > > > > o To allow SCTP traffic to pass through legacy NATs, which do not > > provide native SCTP support as specified in [BEHAVE] and > > [NATSUPP]. > > > > o To allow SCTP to be implemented on hosts that do not provide > > direct access to the IP layer. In particular, applications can > > use their own SCTP implementation if the operating system does not > > provide one. > > Marcelo, Neil - please review if you want this one to make 5.10. On the works! > Otherwise we can defer until after the merge window. Probably not needed. Thanks, Marcelo 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=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,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 2B04FC433DF for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:41:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C4D22254 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:41:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="jsrlJuFJ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726382AbgJOMlm (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:41:42 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40450 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726309AbgJOMlm (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:41:42 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x82e.google.com (mail-qt1-x82e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04E14C061755; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 05:41:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x82e.google.com with SMTP id r8so1477345qtp.13; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 05:41:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=/ohpcLrN8Yq1+JdiLxGkTxCHhym3BMLnpPVDPygXYRk=; b=jsrlJuFJRhJ09IVFnOSEmAQVhUQ1PpzHJFVZzvdKgjK6xsG6gKlw74MRCyPvnoRENp xHwOpQy/bfmY3WQ4bWkmx9VahDwv9uk6RkNQCyei7+8JXGUswbx82D8OCL0ZeUps9+zN uhYyq46fE6csf0YLjAT2VdQM9oubDbqp74VqKU8tdYYuDCppxo836eY4QzYmFq2aO2AZ p/kOwEn/hJNItTVhaHBS3IRKXYfIiVNjqhmb/4jZBs/GWNWgQZ/eqFw8l9wKTDzyBI+6 syYwq/22TdKRI2OOYBrsbuQqrxLYSOo0eAEXYBpp/NAaAOr/kjv8hfqgKMDMQLeS3kt9 q9qQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=/ohpcLrN8Yq1+JdiLxGkTxCHhym3BMLnpPVDPygXYRk=; b=qPmAy3Vq3M3KYJsXhCkV2/wCdpP6iMaQv8eeG1L5la043cZz/KhMGgPJqj+Kr67pg7 Tyaao6efh89ftjFCDPHjQDAVSP89HnYJ7TzyZI+3aYQok88RbUBijp1DEOLwIzEqokaJ bKKN4cyZBIMTUikXp0BzkeL1TUzq12Jd6jrICZhGIe481p6vl1e1HMdZXRfH6mEEZR54 I3j4G81YA9zF832QIO+zwJ1aAdoAllUlcnUh4uXY9pguKOeQJLrra2w+h2nEfz+OdOTB L1VTdRVckx3VKOsvebMSJjrrofFTce9b736+RJhATxsZew0QhIRcrPBt4Go16R86D+es 5S9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533htSmf6hIN23w3VGQswqMI/08PURCTl0wmebrfU2DaZxFUlFtX h79RT0PEOhP1Zpn6Q5I4ZDA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzGC7u1yk3qfZkbIj2Ep7KbB3jfFLgsZAA+RTxWoVv0Lfta2D08PffkWJ6g4Q5ZrakAx+QO4Q== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5b82:: with SMTP id a2mr3934093qta.176.1602765701188; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 05:41:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([177.220.172.68]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 61sm1073927qta.19.2020.10.15.05.41.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 15 Oct 2020 05:41:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 048D0C1614; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 09:41:38 -0300 (-03) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 09:41:37 -0300 From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Xin Long , network dev , linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman , Michael Tuexen , davem@davemloft.net, gnault@redhat.com, pabeni@redhat.com, willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net-next 00/16] sctp: Implement RFC6951: UDP Encapsulation of SCTP Message-ID: <20201015124137.GA11030@localhost.localdomain> References: <20201014203416.6e0a1604@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201014203416.6e0a1604@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20201015124137.Gu4MImV2MoGmBB6Bm-7Fsh84Egn7DN87fgi2EV_atzw@z> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 08:34:16PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 15:27:25 +0800 Xin Long wrote: > > Description From the RFC: > > > > The Main Reasons: > > > > o To allow SCTP traffic to pass through legacy NATs, which do not > > provide native SCTP support as specified in [BEHAVE] and > > [NATSUPP]. > > > > o To allow SCTP to be implemented on hosts that do not provide > > direct access to the IP layer. In particular, applications can > > use their own SCTP implementation if the operating system does not > > provide one. > > Marcelo, Neil - please review if you want this one to make 5.10. On the works! > Otherwise we can defer until after the merge window. Probably not needed. Thanks, Marcelo