From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E88E1B029 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2018 09:47:11 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jan 2018 00:47:10 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,330,1511856000"; d="scan'208";a="191277359" Received: from pgsmsx108.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.44.103]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2018 00:47:08 -0800 Received: from pgsmsx102.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.144]) by PGSMSX108.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.8.194]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Mon, 8 Jan 2018 16:47:07 +0800 From: "Gowda, Sandesh" To: "Avi Cohen (A)" , "users@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: IPSEC-SECGW sample application Thread-Index: AdOHy7KaBzLhC8jTTQWybyU8LedmBwAkRJQA Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 08:47:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiYzNhN2MzMjYtZDBkZC00ZThlLThlNjYtNGNmY2ZiN2IyNDQyIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE2LjUuOS4zIiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6Ik1TeXYxcDRnMDFwZG9EVGNObEdQdmhodW96VGc0S2VreHJGb3Z2NWhPUjQ9In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.0.116 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [172.30.20.205] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] IPSEC-SECGW sample application X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 08:47:11 -0000 Hi Avi, The application classifies the ports as Protected and Unprotected. Thus, t= raffic received on an Unprotected or Protected port is consider Inbound or = Outbound respectively. ( Refer : http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.html ) The Packets sent on a Unprotected network requires Encryption whereas pac= kets on Protected Network can be plain text. This is the expected behavior. Regards, Sandesh =20 -----Original Message----- From: users [mailto:users-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Avi Cohen (A) Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 9:12 PM To: users@dpdk.org Subject: [dpdk-users] IPSEC-SECGW sample application Hello I'm using the DPDK17.11 and running the sample app. Ipsec_secgw. I have 2 ports port 0 is protected and port 1 is unprotected Traffic is rec= eived in the unprotected and should be sent to the protected port for enc= ryption But the traffic processing for the traffic received in the unprotec= ted port is going through the **process_pkts_inbound ** . I expect that the traffic should be directed to the **process_pkts_outboun= d** [where ESP headers are added etc.] Can someone help ? This is the config file: #SP rules sp ipv4 in esp protect 5 src 1.1.1.2/32 dst 1.1.2.10/32=20 #SA rules sa in 5 cipher_algo aes-128-cbc cipher_key 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0 = \ auth_algo sha1-hmac auth_key 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0 \ mode ipv4-tunnel src 172.16.1.5 dst 172.16.2.5 \ type inline-protocol-offload port_id 0 #Routing rules rt ipv4 dst 172.16.2.5/32 port 0 rt ipv4 dst 1.1.2.0/24 port 0 rt ipv4 dst 1.1.1.0/24 port 0 and this is the command line to run the applic: ./ipsec-secgw -l 1 -n 2 -- -p 0x3 -P -u 0x2 --config=3D"(0,0,1),(1,0,1)" -f= ../ep1.cfg Best Regards Avi