Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] UDP tunnel encapsulation module for tunnelling different protocols like MPLS,IP,NSH etc.

[Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>]

> > I do think that with close scrutiny there is a lot more room for code
> > deduplication. Just look at the lower half of geneve_rx and
> > bareudp_udp_encap_recv, for instance. This, too, is identical down to
> > the comments. Indeed, is it fair to say that geneve was taken as the
> > basis for this device?
> >
> > That said, even just avoiding duplicating those routing functions
> > would be a good start.
> >
> > I'm harping on this because in other examples in the past where a new
> > device was created by duplicating instead of factoring out code
> > implementations diverge over time in bad ways due to optimizations,
> > features and most importantly bugfixes being applied only to one
> > instance or the other. See for instance tun.c and tap.c.
> >
> > Unrelated, an ipv6 socket can receive both ipv4 and ipv6 traffic if
> > not setting the v6only bit, so does the device need to have separate
> > sock4 and sock6 members? Both sockets currently lead to the same
> > bareudp_udp_encap_recv callback function.
>
> I was checking this.AF_INET6 allows v6 and v4 mapped v6 address.
> And it doesnot allow both at the same time.So we need both
> sockets to support v4 and v6 at the same time.correct ?

bareudp_create_sock currently creates an inet socket listening on
INADDR_ANY and an inet6 socket listening on in6addr_any with v6only.
If so, just the latter without v6only should offer the same.