On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 4:54 AM, Jiri Benc <jb...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Commit 3511494ce2f3d ("vxlan: Group Policy extension") changed definition of
> VXLAN_HF_RCO from 0x00200000 to BIT(24). This is obviously incorrect. It's
> also in violation with the RFC draft.
>
> Fixes: 3511494ce2f3d ("vxlan: Group Policy extension")
> Cc: Thomas Graf <tg...@suug.ch>
> Cc: Tom Herbert <therb...@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Benc <jb...@redhat.com>
> ---
> This code is, unfortunately, in the tree since 4.0. Not sure whether we can
> change it now. On the other hand, we're in violation with the RFC draft and
> collide with VXLAN-GPE flags assignment which defines this bit as OAM flag.
>
> Opinions welcome, especially by Tom and Thomas.
Thanks Jiri!
What a mess VXLAN has become. There are no guidelines or order in
defining these reserved bits! If anyone is looking to do some work in
encapsulation please consider bringing up VXLAN-GPE/NSH in the stack,
hopefully that world will be better....
Acked-by: Tom Herbert <t...@herbertland.com>
> ---
> include/net/vxlan.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/vxlan.h b/include/net/vxlan.h
> index c1c899c3a51b..e289ada6adf6 100644
> --- a/include/net/vxlan.h
> +++ b/include/net/vxlan.h
> @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ struct vxlanhdr {
> };
>
> /* VXLAN header flags. */
> -#define VXLAN_HF_RCO BIT(24)
> +#define VXLAN_HF_RCO BIT(21)
> #define VXLAN_HF_VNI BIT(27)
> #define VXLAN_HF_GBP BIT(31)
>
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
> --
> 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
--
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
