From: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>,
"Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio" <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/ipsec-secgw: Update checksum while decrementing ttl
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 02:29:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8973CA1ABF3@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DB3PR04MB10743C10BC39E6D154FA82DE6D20@DB3PR04MB107.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Akhil Goyal [mailto:akhil.goyal@nxp.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 1:38 AM
> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo; Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] examples/ipsec-secgw: Update checksum while
> decrementing ttl
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: De Lara Guarch, Pablo [mailto:pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 10:35 PM
> To: Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>; Akhil
> Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] examples/ipsec-secgw: Update checksum while
> decrementing ttl
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio
> > Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 5:05 AM
> > To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo; Akhil Goyal; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] examples/ipsec-secgw: Update checksum while
> > decrementing ttl
> >
> > On 07/10/2016 21:53, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Akhil Goyal [mailto:akhil.goyal@nxp.com]
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 11:33 PM
> > >> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo; Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio; dev@dpdk.org
> > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] examples/ipsec-secgw: Update checksum while
> > >> decrementing ttl
> > >>
> > >> On 10/5/2016 6:04 AM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Sergio
> > Gonzalez
> > >>>> Monroy
> > >>>> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 6:28 AM
> > >>>> To: akhil.goyal@nxp.com; dev@dpdk.org
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/ipsec-secgw: Update
> > checksum
> > >>>> while decrementing ttl
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Akhil,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This application relies on checksum offload in both outbound and
> > >> inbound
> > >>>> paths (PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM flag).
> > >> [Akhil]Agreed that the application relies on checksum offload, but
> > >> here we are talking about the inner ip header. Inner IP checksum
> > >> will be updated on the next end point after decryption. This would
> > >> expect that the next end point must have checksum offload
> > >> capability. What if we are capturing the encrypted packets on
> > >> wireshark or say send it to some other machine which does not run
> > >> DPDK and do not know about
> > checksum
> > >> offload, then wireshark/other machine will not be able to get the
> > >> correct the checksum and will show error.
> >
> > Understood, we need to have a valid inner checksum.
> > RFC1624 states that the computation would be incorrect in
> > corner/boundary case.
> > I reckon you are basing your incremental update on RFC1141?
> >
> > Also I think you should take care of endianess and increment the
> > checksum with
> > host_to_be(0x0100) instead of +1.
> >
> > >>>> Because we assume that we always forward the packet in both
> > >>>> paths,
> > we
> > >>>> decrement the ttl in both inbound and outbound.
> > >>>> You seem to only increment (recalculate) the checksum of the
> > >>>> inner IP header in the outbound path but not the inbound path.
> > >> [Akhil]Correct I missed out the inbound path.
> > >>>> Also, in the inbound path you have to consider a possible ECN
> > >>>> value
> > >> update.
> > >> [Akhil]If I take care of the ECN then it would mean I need to
> > >> calculate the checksum completely, incremental checksum wont give
> correct results.
> > >> This would surely impact performance. Any suggestion on how should
> > >> we take care of ECN update. Should I recalculate the checksum and
> > >> send the patch for ECN update? Or do we have a better solution.
> >
> > If I am understanding the RFCs mentioned above correctly, you should
> > be able to do incremental checksum update for any 16bit field/value of
> > the IP header.
> > I don't see no reason why you couldn't do something like that, except
> > that you would have to follow the full equation instead of just adding
> > 0x0100, which would be always the case when decrementing TTL.
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> Any comments, Akhil?
>
> Ok.. will send next version soon.
Hi Akhil,
Are you sending that version soon? It won't make it the RC2, but it may be merged for RC3.
Thanks,
Pablo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-26 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-26 16:32 akhil.goyal
2016-09-26 13:28 ` Sergio Gonzalez Monroy
2016-10-05 0:34 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-10-05 6:32 ` Akhil Goyal
2016-10-07 20:53 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-10-10 12:05 ` Sergio Gonzalez Monroy
2016-10-17 17:05 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-10-19 8:38 ` Akhil Goyal
2016-10-26 2:29 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo [this message]
2016-09-26 16:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/test: Remove hard coding for nb_queue_pairs in test_cryptodev akhil.goyal
2016-09-26 19:36 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-09-29 14:12 ` Trahe, Fiona
2016-09-29 14:25 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-09-29 14:29 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-09-26 16:33 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test_cryptodev_perf: IV and digest should be stored at a DMAeble address akhil.goyal
2016-10-05 6:40 ` Akhil Goyal
2016-10-05 9:26 ` Kusztal, ArkadiuszX
2016-10-07 11:32 ` Akhil Goyal
2016-10-07 17:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " akhil.goyal
2016-10-07 21:36 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-10-10 5:22 ` Akhil Goyal
2016-10-10 16:24 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
[not found] ` <20161012111629.14126-1-akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
2016-10-12 18:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Trahe, Fiona
2016-10-13 19:35 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-09-29 17:18 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] app/test: remove hard-coding of crypto num qps Fiona Trahe
2016-10-05 0:49 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-10-06 14:55 ` Trahe, Fiona
2016-10-06 17:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] remove hard-coding of crypto num qps and cleanup Fiona Trahe
2016-10-07 0:29 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-10-07 0:57 ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-10-06 17:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] crypto/aesni_mb: free ring memory on qp release in PMD Fiona Trahe
2016-10-06 17:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] app/test: remove pointless for loop Fiona Trahe
2016-10-06 17:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] app/test: cleanup unnecessary ring size setup Fiona Trahe
2016-10-06 17:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] app/test: remove hard-coding of crypto num qps Fiona Trahe
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=E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8973CA1ABF3@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
--cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.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).