Message ID | cover.1561457281.git.sd@queasysnail.net |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | ipsec: add TCP encapsulation support (RFC 8229) | expand |
Hi Steffen, 2019-06-25, 12:11:33 +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > This patchset introduces support for TCP encapsulation of IKE and ESP > messages, as defined by RFC 8229 [0]. It is an evolution of what > Herbert Xu proposed in January 2018 [1] that addresses the main > criticism against it, by not interfering with the TCP implementation > at all. The networking stack now has infrastructure for this: TCP ULPs > and Stream Parsers. Have you had a chance to look at this? I was going to rebase and resend, but the patches still apply to ipsec-next and net-next (patch 2 is already in net-next as commit bd95e678e0f6). Thanks,
On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 04:18:14PM +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > Hi Steffen, > > 2019-06-25, 12:11:33 +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > This patchset introduces support for TCP encapsulation of IKE and ESP > > messages, as defined by RFC 8229 [0]. It is an evolution of what > > Herbert Xu proposed in January 2018 [1] that addresses the main > > criticism against it, by not interfering with the TCP implementation > > at all. The networking stack now has infrastructure for this: TCP ULPs > > and Stream Parsers. > > Have you had a chance to look at this? I was going to rebase and > resend, but the patches still apply to ipsec-next and net-next (patch > 2 is already in net-next as commit bd95e678e0f6). I had a look and I have no general objection against this. If you think the patchset is ready for inclusion, just remove the RFC and resend it. I'll have a closer on it look then.
2019-08-21, 08:59:11 +0200, Steffen Klassert wrote: > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 04:18:14PM +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > Hi Steffen, > > > > 2019-06-25, 12:11:33 +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > > This patchset introduces support for TCP encapsulation of IKE and ESP > > > messages, as defined by RFC 8229 [0]. It is an evolution of what > > > Herbert Xu proposed in January 2018 [1] that addresses the main > > > criticism against it, by not interfering with the TCP implementation > > > at all. The networking stack now has infrastructure for this: TCP ULPs > > > and Stream Parsers. > > > > Have you had a chance to look at this? I was going to rebase and > > resend, but the patches still apply to ipsec-next and net-next (patch > > 2 is already in net-next as commit bd95e678e0f6). > > I had a look and I have no general objection against this. If you > think the patchset is ready for inclusion, just remove the RFC and > resend it. I'll have a closer on it look then. Ok, thanks, I'll repost.