Hi Jakub,
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:49:04 -0800
Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> LGTM! Please address the nit and repost without the iproute2 patch.
Thanks for the review of the patchset.
> Mixing the iproute2 patch in has confused patchwork:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?serie
On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:37:20 -0700 David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/25/20 9:47 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:37:18 -0700 David Ahern wrote:
> >> On 11/24/20 6:58 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >>> But it's generally not a huge issue for applying the patch. I just like
> >>> to see
On 11/25/20 9:47 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:37:18 -0700 David Ahern wrote:
>> On 11/24/20 6:58 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> But it's generally not a huge issue for applying the patch. I just like
>>> to see the build bot result, to make sure we're not adding W=1 C=1
>>> war
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:37:18 -0700 David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/24/20 6:58 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > But it's generally not a huge issue for applying the patch. I just like
> > to see the build bot result, to make sure we're not adding W=1 C=1
> > warnings.
>
> ah, the build bot part is new. g
On 11/24/20 6:58 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> But it's generally not a huge issue for applying the patch. I just like
> to see the build bot result, to make sure we're not adding W=1 C=1
> warnings.
ah, the build bot part is new. got it.
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 18:24:37 -0700 David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/24/20 4:49 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >
> > LGTM! Please address the nit and repost without the iproute2 patch.
> > Mixing the iproute2 patch in has confused patchwork:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?seri
On 11/24/20 4:49 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>
> LGTM! Please address the nit and repost without the iproute2 patch.
> Mixing the iproute2 patch in has confused patchwork:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=389667&state=*
>
> Note how it thinks that the iproute2 patch
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 19:28:48 +0100 Andrea Mayer wrote:
> - Patch 1 is needed to solve a pre-existing issue with tunneled packets
> when a sniffer is attached;
>
> - Patch 2 improves the management of the seg6local attributes used by the
> SRv6 behaviors;
>
> - Patch 3 adds support for optiona
This patchset provides support for the SRv6 End.DT4 and SRv6 End.DT6 (VRF mode)
behavior.
The SRv6 End.DT4 is used to implement multi-tenant IPv4 L3 VPN. It decapsulates
the received packets and performs IPv4 routing lookup in the routing table of
the tenant. The SRv6 End.DT4 Linux implementation
