Thomas Graf <tg...@suug.ch> writes: > On 06/02/15 at 01:26pm, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> What we really want here is xfrm-lite. By lite I mean the tunnel >> selection criteria is simple enough that it fits into the normal >> routing table instead of having to do weird flow based magic that >> is rarely needed. >> >> I believe what we want are the xfrm stacking of dst entries. > > I assume you are referring to reusing the selector and stacked > dst. I considered that for the transmit side. > > Can you elaborate on this some more? How would this look like > for the specific case of VXLAN? Any thoughts on the receive > side? You also mention that you dislike the net_device approach. > What do you suggest instead? The encapsulation is often postponed > to after the packet is fully constructed. Where should it get > hooked into?
Thomas I may have misunderstood what you are trying to do. Is what you were aiming for roughly the existing RTA_FLOW so you can transmit packets out one network device and have enough information to know which of a set of tunnels of a given type you want the packets go into? Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
