From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49CBFA0512; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 18:38:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14AAA1BFC3; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 18:38:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com (mail-lj1-f195.google.com [209.85.208.195]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54B2E1BF82 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 18:38:39 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id u71so15268795lje.11 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:38:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=semihalf-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=M+MW+VI+gA7NdDg8ZkcOw/XNTtRIPmnnNqS4IEyI/dc=; b=QFw7MrtWOdrnRpoILHoWXZamkyXLteYwUzeukGzB+EkU38AWXoqk3mKv4rN3eQKt5y 1xgtnGjvQh3iTa0oHWpY9ELmH/V/NXp112uxbfQ4ohw2tTeS1+OQ6tf7CK/YdSM4Jrlu 93IHOeyGRlnXDTAm04ZhCgryuzoEV+nhhfXtagsipNAlg+M7LjoH5T/5lih6+3siFjej 7/0VSm1m4CKg0I6vXibAO8WN6KfzWxZcOyijIPzk3Jn5Qe5uT30iaL2Jq00wHP7Kwowj NwORfDbravwuj6WUXfDCZFthn+Nobl/9tdu8Fli/6whTjWo+Vmue21RdOFw7SmfdrDJv VxjQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=M+MW+VI+gA7NdDg8ZkcOw/XNTtRIPmnnNqS4IEyI/dc=; b=F5644LLm5NWlxTF44RFRxvYgvx1hp7euBq+toy6OHwgP/ysgHDHwzLnVIq7KOJw0Hw Bmxyvbqv24Ah7xUBYgArUy0ps+IijdherWBBAObh+AW4YY3/mexgYkQDY1ieMi+TJpYL 8ThGM5wql7aVdM9Dk+hmrdfgj3e+S3tkLjfq34+HuIkrovCcQqxcbSpgingLkIUde2aj GrA4WaXVN7G0mg/yBG9DWM1FMLo63/8w37wLL/utIjbqzPWa4ki3WJRHWXquzYRhn9Xh OrO0CHUNRtAi3ORVb9UHkEJeRwhToY3OfPjzcXf0AxaeKxEUuM/ThLS2Nv/Igxb9F9TT h/sQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWpU3COK+4tggQSG+g8k3HXWKwzFAxrwAl2iOVK7U0WTy3muWsM 5u3vLBkqy3bRHgS8ospisEnFYfT632YTUA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy2NZqSEdQfH+KZwyRONfH1Gs82CPpuDrip5otCGc/JTNlNyzqY6uVxif0+HPbp5g2ziW0klg== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8152:: with SMTP id t18mr13835219ljg.255.1579023518504; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:38:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.0.72] (31-172-191-173.noc.fibertech.net.pl. [31.172.191.173]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d24sm7845010lja.82.2020.01.14.09.38.37 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:38:37 -0800 (PST) To: dev@dpdk.org References: <20200114142517.29522-1-aostruszka@marvell.com> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60CE0@smartserver.smartshare.dk> From: Andrzej Ostruszka Message-ID: <3d3bec6c-723e-0f4e-4b67-d4b9e0ee6902@semihalf.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 18:38:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60CE0@smartserver.smartshare.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/3] introduce IF proxy library X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 1/14/20 4:16 PM, Morten Brørup wrote: > Andrzej, Hello Morten > Basically you are adding a very small subset of the Linux IP stack> to interface with DPDK applications via callbacks. Yes, at the moment this is limited - we'd prefer first to solicit some input from community. > The library also seems to support interfacing to the route table, > so it is not "interface proxy" but "IP stack proxy". True, to some extent - for example you can bring the interface up and down which has nothing to do with IP stack. As for the name of the library - that is actually part where we are completely open. The proxy represents port (thus the name) but that is not all, so any better name proposals are welcome. > You already mention ARP table as future work. How about namespaces, > ip tables, and other advanced features... I foresee the Devil in the > details for any real use case. Right now I don't know what other things are needed. This idea is still early. However imagine you'd like to use DPDK to speed up packet processing of IP stack - would you like to implement all the protocols that are needed? Or just let the system handle the control path and handle the data path and sniff the control params from the system. > Unless the library is an O/S wrapper to make Linux NETLINK-like messages > available from other operating systems, ... The idea is to have this system independent - and in the "next things" I've mentioned splitting current implementation into common and system-dependent parts. AFAIK we do not plan to provide implementation for other systems, but would like to form it so that is clear how to do that. As mentioned in the description FreeBSD implementation could be really similar but the Windows one would probably require some thread polling periodically system with "IP Helper" lib calls - I'm not Windows programmer. So no - the intent is not to provide "NETLINK-like messages" to other systems. > ... I don't really see the value in this library... if it is Linux > specific, why not just use NETLINK in the DPDK application's control > plane? NETLINK is just Linux specific implementation. And if you confine yourself only to a Linux specific world - you can think of this library as what you have just described :). Free implementation of NETLINK handling - with a defined API. Best regards Andrzej