DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, borisp@mellanox.com, declan.doherty@intel.com,
	radu.nicolau@intel.com, aviadye@mellanox.com,
	sandeep.malik@nxp.com, hemant.agrawal@nxp.com,
	pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/1] IPSec Inline and look aside crypto offload
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 16:49:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2166799.Q9jkndJmdM@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170725112153.29699-1-akhil.goyal@nxp.com>

Hi,

I try to understand how things are connected,
but too many things are not clear for someone not involved in security.

25/07/2017 13:21, Akhil Goyal:
> struct rte_security_session *
> rte_security_session_create(struct rte_mempool *mempool);

What is the usage of this mempool?

[...]
> These are very similar to what Declan proposed with a few additions.
> This can be updated further for other security protocols like MACSec and DTLS

You should avoid referencing another proposal without
- link to the proposal
- summary of the proposal

[...]
> Now, after the application configures the session using above APIs, it needs to
> attach the  session with the crypto_op in case the session is configured for
> crypto look aside protocol offload. For IPSec inline/ full protocol offload
> using NIC, the mbuf ol_flags can be set as per the RFC suggested by Boris.

Again a missing reference (link + summary).

Even worst, the RFCv2 references this v1 without copying the explanations.
It is too hard to track, or maybe it is cryptic on purpose ;)

[...]
> Now the application(ipsec-secgw) have 4 paths to decide for the data path.
> 1. Non-protocol offload (currently implemented)
> 2. IPSec inline(only crypto operations using NIC)
> 3. full protocol offload(crypto operations along with all the IPsec header
>    and trailer processing using NIC)
> 4. look aside protocol offload(single-pass encryption and authentication with
>    additional levels of protocol processing offload using crypto device)

I feel these 4 paths are the most important to discuss.
Unfortunately there are not enough detailed.
Please explain the purpose and implementation of each one.

> The application can decide using the below action types
> enum rte_security_session_action_type {
>         RTE_SECURITY_SESS_ETH_INLINE_CRYPTO,
>         /**< Crypto operations are performed by Network interface */

In this mode, the ethdev port does the same thing as a crypto port?

>         RTE_SECURITY_SESS_ETH_PROTO_OFFLOAD,
>         /**< Crypto operations with protocol support are performed
>          * by Network/ethernet device.
>          */
>         RTE_SECURITY_SESS_CRYPTO_PROTO_OFFLOAD,
>         /**< Crypto operations with protocol support are performed
>          * by Crypto device.
>          */

I guess the difference between ETH_PROTO_OFFLOAD and CRYPTO_PROTO_OFFLOAD
is that we must re-inject packets from CRYPTO_PROTO_OFFLOAD to the NIC?

>         RTE_SECURITY_SESS_NONE
> 	/**< Non protocol offload. Application need to manage everything */
> };

What RTE_SECURITY_SESS_NONE does? It is said to be implemented above.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-08-29 14:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-10  7:35 [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/7] ipsec inline Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/7] ethdev: add device ipsec encrypt/decrypt capability flags Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 2/7] ethdev: Add ESP header to generic flow steering Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 3/7] ethdev: add rte flow action for crypto Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 4/7] cryptodev: add ipsec xform Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 5/7] mbuf: Add IPsec crypto flags Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 6/7] mbuf: Added next_esp_proto field Boris Pismenny
2017-07-10  7:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 7/7] example/ipsec_gw: Support SA offload in datapath Boris Pismenny
2017-07-11 17:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/7] ipsec inline Declan Doherty
2017-07-12 14:08   ` Boris Pismenny
2017-07-14 11:12   ` Akhil Goyal
2017-07-25 11:21     ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/1] IPSec Inline and look aside crypto offload Akhil Goyal
2017-07-25 11:21       ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 1/1] rte_security: proposal Akhil Goyal
2017-07-26 13:46       ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/1] IPSec Inline and look aside crypto offload Declan Doherty
2017-08-02 13:16         ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-08-03 11:25           ` Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35       ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] " Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35         ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 1/4] rte_security: API definitions Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15 11:04           ` Radu Nicolau
2017-08-16  7:39             ` Akhil Goyal
2017-08-16 15:40               ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-08-18  9:16                 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-18 12:20                   ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-08-21 10:32                   ` Boris Pismenny
2017-08-21 10:54                     ` Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35         ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 2/4] cryptodev: entend cryptodev to support security APIs Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35         ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 3/4] crypto/dpaa2_sec: add support for protocol offload ipsec Akhil Goyal
2017-08-15  6:35         ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 4/4] example/ipsec-secgw: add support for offloading crypto op Akhil Goyal
2017-08-29 14:49       ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2017-08-31  9:37         ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/1] IPSec Inline and look aside crypto offload Akhil Goyal
2017-08-31 10:06           ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-31 10:52             ` Akhil Goyal
2017-08-31 13:14               ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-31 14:09                 ` Radu Nicolau
2017-09-06 15:53                   ` Jerin Jacob
2017-09-08 11:12                     ` Akhil Goyal
2017-09-11 18:10                       ` Jerin Jacob

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=2166799.Q9jkndJmdM@xps \
    --to=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
    --cc=aviadye@mellanox.com \
    --cc=borisp@mellanox.com \
    --cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
    --cc=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
    --cc=radu.nicolau@intel.com \
    --cc=sandeep.malik@nxp.com \
    /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).