On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 12:32 AM Paul Blakey wrote:
>
>
> On 6/18/2019 7:03 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:24 PM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> > wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 11:07:37AM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 9:44 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
>
On 6/18/2019 7:03 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:24 PM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 11:07:37AM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 9:44 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
>>> wrote:
I had suggested to let act_ct handle the above as w
On 6/19/2019 9:33 PM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:28:31PM +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
> ...
>> +static int tcf_ct_fill_params_nat(struct tcf_ct_params *p,
>> + struct tc_ct *parm,
>> + struct nlattr **tb,
>> +
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:28:31PM +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
...
> +static int tcf_ct_fill_params_nat(struct tcf_ct_params *p,
> + struct tc_ct *parm,
> + struct nlattr **tb,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:24 PM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 11:07:37AM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 9:44 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> > wrote:
> > > I had suggested to let act_ct handle the above as well, as there is a
> > > big chunk of code
On 6/14/2019 9:02 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:05 AM Paul Blakey wrote:
>> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
>> labels and nat parameters.
>>
> This is too short to justify why you want to play with L3 stuff in L2.
> Please be as specific as you
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 11:07:37AM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 9:44 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> wrote:
> > I had suggested to let act_ct handle the above as well, as there is a
> > big chunk of code on both that is pretty similar. There is quite some
> > boilerplate for inte
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 9:44 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
wrote:
> I had suggested to let act_ct handle the above as well, as there is a
> big chunk of code on both that is pretty similar. There is quite some
> boilerplate for interfacing with conntrack which is duplicated.
Why do you want to mix r
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:05 AM Paul Blakey wrote:
>
> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
> labels and nat parameters.
>
This is too short to justify why you want to play with L3 stuff in L2.
Please be as specific as you can.
Also, please document its use case too.
hello Paul!
On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 16:28 +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
> +#endif /* __NET_TC_CT_H */
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h b/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h
> index a93680f..c5264d7 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h
> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@
On Thu, 2019-06-13 at 12:16 +0200, Davide Caratti wrote:
> hello Paul!
>
> On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 16:28 +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
>
> > +#endif /* __NET_TC_CT_H */
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h b/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h
> > index a93680f..c5264d7 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/
> On 11 Jun 2019, at 16:15, Paul Blakey wrote:
>
>
> On 6/11/2019 4:59 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Paul Blakey writes:
>>
>>> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
>>> labels and nat parameters.
>> How is this different from the newly merged ctinfo action
On 6/12/2019 10:55 PM, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Paul Blakey wrote:
>> +/* The conntrack module expects to be working at L3. */
> It also expects that IP stack has validated ip(v6)
> headers and has pulled the ip header into linear area.
>
> What are your plans wrt. IP fragments? AFAICS right
On 6/12/2019 9:04 PM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:28:31PM +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
>> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
>> labels and nat parameters.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paul Blakey
>> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
>> Sig
On 6/11/2019 11:23 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Marcelo Ricardo Leitner writes:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 05:34:50PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>>> Paul Blakey writes:
>>>
On 6/11/2019 4:59 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Paul Blakey writes:
>
>> Allow s
On 6/13/2019 1:49 PM, Davide Caratti wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-06-13 at 12:16 +0200, Davide Caratti wrote:
>> hello Paul!
>>
>> On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 16:28 +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
>>
>>> +#endif /* __NET_TC_CT_H */
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h b/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h
>>> inde
Paul Blakey writes:
> On 6/11/2019 11:23 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Marcelo Ricardo Leitner writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 05:34:50PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
Paul Blakey writes:
> On 6/11/2019 4:59 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Paul Blakey
Paul Blakey wrote:
> + /* The conntrack module expects to be working at L3. */
It also expects that IP stack has validated ip(v6)
headers and has pulled the ip header into linear area.
What are your plans wrt. IP fragments? AFAICS right now they will
not match which means they won't be NATed
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:28:31PM +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
> labels and nat parameters.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Blakey
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> Signed-off-by: Yossi Kuperman
> Acked-by: Jiri Pirko
> ---
>
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner writes:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 05:34:50PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Paul Blakey writes:
>>
>> > On 6/11/2019 4:59 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> >> Paul Blakey writes:
>> >>
>> >>> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 05:34:50PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Paul Blakey writes:
>
> > On 6/11/2019 4:59 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> >> Paul Blakey writes:
> >>
> >>> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
> >>> labels and nat parameters.
> >> How
Paul Blakey writes:
> On 6/11/2019 4:59 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Paul Blakey writes:
>>
>>> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
>>> labels and nat parameters.
>> How is this different from the newly merged ctinfo action?
>>
>> -Toke
>
> Hi,
>
> ctinfo do
On 6/11/2019 4:59 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Paul Blakey writes:
>
>> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
>> labels and nat parameters.
> How is this different from the newly merged ctinfo action?
>
> -Toke
Hi,
ctinfo does one of two very specific things,
Paul Blakey writes:
> Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
> labels and nat parameters.
How is this different from the newly merged ctinfo action?
-Toke
> Signed-off-by: Paul Blakey
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> Signed-off-by: Yossi Kuperman
> Acked
Allow sending a packet to conntrack and set conntrack zone, mark,
labels and nat parameters.
Signed-off-by: Paul Blakey
Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
Signed-off-by: Yossi Kuperman
Acked-by: Jiri Pirko
---
include/net/flow_offload.h| 5 +
include/net/tc_act/tc_ct.h|
25 matches
Mail list logo
