On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 16:33:14 +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> > But can there be any potential issues if the TCP socket with esp ULP is
> > also inserted into a sockmap? (well, I think sockmap socket gets a ULP,
> > I think we prevent sockmap on top of ULP but not the other way around..)
>
> Yeah
2019-10-15, 11:46:57 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 10:24:24 +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> > 2019-10-14, 14:43:27 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> > > From: Sabrina Dubroca
> > > Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:57:23 +0200
> > >
> > > > This patchset introduces support for TCP encap
On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 10:24:24 +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> 2019-10-14, 14:43:27 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Sabrina Dubroca
> > Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:57:23 +0200
> >
> > > This patchset introduces support for TCP encapsulation of IKE and ESP
> > > messages, as defined by RFC 8229
2019-10-14, 14:43:27 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Sabrina Dubroca
> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:57:23 +0200
>
> > This patchset introduces support for TCP encapsulation of IKE and ESP
> > messages, as defined by RFC 8229 [0]. It is an evolution of what
> > Herbert Xu proposed in January 2018
From: Sabrina Dubroca
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 16:57:23 +0200
> This patchset introduces support for TCP encapsulation of IKE and ESP
> messages, as defined by RFC 8229 [0]. It is an evolution of what
> Herbert Xu proposed in January 2018 [1] that addresses the main
> criticism against it, by not i
This patchset introduces support for TCP encapsulation of IKE and ESP
messages, as defined by RFC 8229 [0]. It is an evolution of what
Herbert Xu proposed in January 2018 [1] that addresses the main
criticism against it, by not interfering with the TCP implementation
at all. The networking stack no
