>>
>> 1. "DPDK does not keep track of flow rules definitions or flow rule objects
>> automatically. Applications may keep track of the former and
>> must keep track of the latter."
>> DPDK rte_flow spec d
,
Lukasz
On 16.04.2020 14:28, Lukas Bartosik [C] wrote:
> Hi Konstantin,
>
> Please see my answer below.
>
> Thanks,
> Lukasz
>
> On 16.04.2020 01:47, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>> External Email
>>
>> ---
Hi Vladimir,
How does this patch relate to http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/66715/.
Both patches replace lookup function rte_hash_lookup_bulk_data used in
__ipsec_sad_lookup with
rte_hash_lookup_with_hash_bulk_data or rte_dwk_hash_lookup.
Is the plan for both solutions to coexist or will only one
Hi Konstantin,
Please see my answer below.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 16.04.2020 01:47, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> External Email
>
> --
>
>
> Hi Lukasz,
>
>> Hi Konstantin,
>>
>> In this patch I moved the sa_init() before rte_eth
Hi Konstantin,
In this patch I moved the sa_init() before rte_eth_dev_start() in order to
avoid dropping
of IPsec pkts when a traffic flows and the ipsec-secgw application is started.
However I remember that during review of event mode patches you mentioned that
moving sa_init() before rte_eth_d
merging the patchset.
>
> Regards,
> Akhil
>>
>> Hi Akhil,
>>
>> Reminder.
>>
>> Do you have any further review comments?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Anoob
>>
>>> -Original Message-----
>>> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
>>>
Hi Akhil,
Please see my answer below.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 27.02.2020 13:07, Akhil Goyal wrote:
>>
>> Hi Lukasz,
>>
Is it not possible to use the existing functions for finding routes,
checking
>>> packet types and checking security policies.
It will be very difficult to manage
Hi Akhil,
Please see my answer below.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 26.02.2020 07:04, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
>
>>>
>>> Is it not possible to use the existing functions for finding routes,
>>> checking
>> packet types and checking security policies.
>>> It will be very difficult to manage two sepa
Hi Akhil,
Please see my answer below.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 24.02.2020 14:40, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> External Email
>
> --
> Hi Anoob/Lukasz,
>
>>
>> This series introduces event-mode additions to ipsec-secgw.
>>
>> With this series
Hi Akhil,
Please see my answers below.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 24.02.2020 15:13, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> External Email
>
> --
> Hi Lukasz/Anoob,
>
>>
>> Add application inbound/outbound worker thread and
>> IPsec application processin
Hi Konstantin,
Please see inline.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 05.02.2020 14:42, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> External Email
>
> --
>
> Hi Lukasz,
>
>> Make number of buffers in a pool nb_mbuf_in_pool dependent on number
>> of ports, c
Hi Konstantin,
On 31.01.2020 02:09, Lukasz Bartosik wrote:
> Hi Konstantin,
>
> On 30.01.2020 23:21, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
>>> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2020 11:13 AM
&g
Hi Konstantin,
On 30.01.2020 23:21, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
>> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2020 11:13 AM
>> To: Lukas Bartosik ; Anoob Joseph
>> ; Akhil Goyal ; Nicolau, Radu
>
Hi Konstantin,
Please see inline.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 30.01.2020 00:31, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> External Email
>
> --
>> Add eventmode support to ipsec-secgw. With the aid of event helper
>> configure and use the eventmode ca
Hi Konstantin,
Please see inline.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 24.12.2019 14:13, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> External Email
>
> --
>
>> --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_worker.c
>> +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_worker.c
>> @@ -15,6 +
Hi Konstantin,
Please see inline.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 23.12.2019 17:49, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> External Email
>
> --
>
>
>>
>> Add IPsec application processing code for event mode.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anoob Joseph
>> Si
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 7:51 PM
>> To: Anoob Joseph ; Akhil Goyal ;
>> Nicolau, Radu ; Thomas Monjalon
>>
>> Cc: Ankur Dwivedi ; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
>> ; Narayana Prasad Raju Athreya
>> ; Archana Muniganti ;
>> Tejasree Kondoj ; Vamsi Krishna
Hi Konstantin
On 30.05.2019 18:51, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
>
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ipsec/esp_outb.c b/lib/librte_ipsec/esp_outb.c
>> index c798bc4..ed5974b 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_ipsec/esp_outb.c
>> +++ b/lib/librte_ipsec/esp_outb.c
>> @@ -126,11 +126,11 @@ outb_tun_pkt_p
Hi Konstantin,
Thank you for the review.
I will send a revised patch which addresses your comments.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 19.05.2019 16:47, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
> Hi Lukasz,
> Thanks for clarifications.
> Looks good in general.
> Few small comments below.
> Konstantin
>
>> When esn is use
On 14.05.2019 15:52, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
>
When esn is used then high-order 32 bits are included in ICV
calculation however are not transmitted. Update packet length
to be consistent with auth data offset and length before crypto
operation. High-order
On 30.04.2019 17:38, Lukas Bartosik wrote:
> External Email
>
> --
>
>
>
>
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 5:05 PM
> To: Lukas Bart
From: Ananyev, Konstantin
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 5:05 PM
To: Lukas Bartosik
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Anoob Joseph
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ipsec: include high order bytes of esn in pkt len
> -Original Message-
> From: Lukasz Bartosik [mailto:
22 matches
Mail list logo
