From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270715AbTGNS72 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:59:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270719AbTGNS72 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:59:28 -0400 Received: from sea2-f50.sea2.hotmail.com ([207.68.165.50]:51470 "EHLO hotmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270715AbTGNS7Z (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:59:25 -0400 X-Originating-IP: [143.182.124.3] X-Originating-Email: [dagriego@hotmail.com] From: "David griego" To: jgarzik@pobox.com Cc: alan@storlinksemi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Alan Shih: "TCP IP Offloading Interface" Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 12:14:13 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jul 2003 19:14:13.0942 (UTC) FILETIME=[1CDFAD60:01C34A3C] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org How does one measure the reliability and security of current software TCP/IP stacks? Some standard set of test would have to be identified and the TOEs would need to be tested against this to ensure that they meet some minimum standard. I would suggest offloading the minimum amount from the OS so that most of the control could be maintaind by the OS stack. This also would make failover/routing changes between TOE -TOE, and TOE-NIC easier. Current offloads such as checksum and segmentation will not be enough for 10GbE processing, so it would have to be something more than we have today. David >From: Jeff Garzik >To: David griego >CC: alan@storlinksemi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Subject: Re: Alan Shih: "TCP IP Offloading Interface" >Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 15:02:35 -0400 > >David griego wrote: >>IMHO, there are several cases for some type of TCP/IP offload. One is for >>embedded systems that are just not capable of doing 1Gbps+. Another is >>with 10GbE, even high end servers will not be able keep up with TCP >>processing/data movement at these speeds. Not being proactive in adopting >>TCP/IP offload will force Linux into accepting some scheme that will not >>necissarily be best. > > >How does one evaluate a TOE stack to be sure that all the security fixes in >Linux are also in that stack? > >How does one evaluate a TOE stack to be sure it doesn't add new security >holes that Linux never had? > > Jeff > > > _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus