From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>
To: Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>, Bing Zhao <bingz@nvidia.com>,
"NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL)" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru" <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ethdev: introduce NAT64 action
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 16:45:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1b3962a8-e8db-45aa-95e7-986d7ee9b37d@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MW2PR12MB4666465777FCC466206DC5C4D6FAA@MW2PR12MB4666.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
On 9/19/2023 11:05 AM, Ori Kam wrote:
> Hi Bing
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bing Zhao <bingz@nvidia.com>
>> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2023 5:07 PM
>> Subject: [RFC PATCH] ethdev: introduce NAT64 action
>>
>> In order to support the communication between IPv4 and IPv6 nodes in
>> the network, different technologies are used, like dual-stacks,
>> tunneling and NAT64. In some IPv4-only clients, it is hard to deploy
>> new software and hardware to support IPv6.
>>
>> NAT64 is a choice and it will also reduce the unnecessary overhead of
>> the traffic in the network. The NAT64 gateways take the
>> responsibility of the packet headers translation between the IPv6
>> clouds and IPv4-only clouds.
>>
>> This action should support the offloading of the IP headers'
>> translation. The following fields should be reset correctly in the
>> translation.
>> - Version
>> - Traffic Class / TOS
>> - Flow Label (0 in v4)
>> - Payload Length / Total length
>> - Next Header
>> - Hop Limit / TTL
>>
>> Since there are different mapping and translating modes of the
>> addresses, it will depend on the capabilities of each vendor.
>>
>> The ICMP* and transport layers protocol is out of the scope of NAT64
>> rte_flow action.
>>
>> Reference links:
>> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6146
>> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6052
>> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6145
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bing Zhao <bingz@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>
> Acked-by: Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
>
Hi Bing,
This is a RFC, but we are not having more comment & objection, so what
do you think to continue with a patch including testpmd implementation?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-21 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-11 14:07 Bing Zhao
2023-09-19 10:05 ` Ori Kam
2023-09-21 15:45 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2023-10-10 9:55 ` Ferruh Yigit
2023-11-28 15:21 ` Bing Zhao
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1b3962a8-e8db-45aa-95e7-986d7ee9b37d@amd.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=bingz@nvidia.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=orika@nvidia.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).