> I think we already discussed this same patch in previous emails
> (Aug-Oct 2023) at
> https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2023-October/279390.html and
> concluded that it is not needed ?
> Did anything change from then ?

Yes, Nithin, we found a way to distinguish the modes by looking into the next header field.
And we definitely need RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_ESP for ESP over UDP support.
Having RTE_PTYPE_INNER_TUNNEL_ESP for this case doesn't make sense,
and, I think, it is better to introduce two L4 types for ESP now. What are your thoughts on this?