On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 12:01:53PM -0800, Tom Herbert wrote: > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Tom Herbert <t...@herbertland.com> wrote: > >> > > We're now seeing several router vendors recommending people to not use > > flow labels for ECMP hashing. This is precisely because when a flow > > label changes, network devices that maintain state (firewalls, NAT, > > load balancers) can't deal with packets being rerouted so connections > > are dropped. Unfortunately, the need for packets of a flow to always > > follow the same path has become an implicit requirement that I think > > we need follow at least as the default behavior. > > > > Martin: is there any change you could resurrect these patches? In > > order to solve the general problem of making routing consistent, I > > believe we want to keep sk_tx_hash consistent for the connection from > > which a consistent flow label can be derived. To avoid the overhead of > > a hash field in sk_common, maybe we could initially set a connection > > hash to a five-tuple hash for a flow instead of a random value? So in > > TW state the consistent hash can be computed on the fly. > > > Sorry, I failed to give credit to Shaohua for submitting the initial > patch. Please take look! Hi Tom, thanks for the info. Shaohua will revisit this when he returns next week.
Martin
