On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 09:53:06AM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 6/17/19 8:39 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> >
> > Do you plan to add IPv6 support? Would be good to have the same features
> > in both stacks.
>
> we really should be mandating equal support for all new changes like this.
>
I will add
On 6/17/19 8:39 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>
> Do you plan to add IPv6 support? Would be good to have the same features
> in both stacks.
we really should be mandating equal support for all new changes like this.
>
> Also, we have tests for these sysctls under
> tools/testing/selftests/net/forward
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 02:38:58PM -0400, Stephen Suryaputra wrote:
> Multipath hash policy value of 0 isn't distributing since the outer IP
> dest and src aren't varied eventhough the inner ones are. Since the flow
> is on the inner ones in the case of tunneled traffic, hashing on them is
> desire
From: Stephen Suryaputra
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:38:58 -0400
> Multipath hash policy value of 0 isn't distributing since the outer IP
> dest and src aren't varied eventhough the inner ones are. Since the flow
> is on the inner ones in the case of tunneled traffic, hashing on them is
> desired.
On 13/06/2019 21:38, Stephen Suryaputra wrote:
> Multipath hash policy value of 0 isn't distributing since the outer IP
> dest and src aren't varied eventhough the inner ones are. Since the flow
> is on the inner ones in the case of tunneled traffic, hashing on them is
> desired.
>
> This is done
Multipath hash policy value of 0 isn't distributing since the outer IP
dest and src aren't varied eventhough the inner ones are. Since the flow
is on the inner ones in the case of tunneled traffic, hashing on them is
desired.
This is done mainly for IP over GRE, hence only tested for that. But
any
