> On May 11, 2020, at 11:03 AM, Christian Hopps wrote:
>
>> On May 11, 2020, at 9:56 AM, Neale Ranns (nranns) wrote:
>>
>> On 11/05/2020 14:28, "Christian Hopps" wrote:
>
>>
>> Is it *really* that big a deal to have a logical interface represent a
>> tunnel mode SA? It actually seems a
istian Hopps
>> Date: Sunday 10 May 2020 at 14:33
>> To: "Neale Ranns (nranns)"
>> Cc: Christian Hopps , vpp-dev
>> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
>>
>>> On May 9, 2020, at 7:23 AM, Neale Ranns via lists.fd.io
>>> wro
uot;
> Cc: Christian Hopps , vpp-dev
> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
>
> > On May 9, 2020, at 7:23 AM, Neale Ranns via lists.fd.io
wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> >
> On May 11, 2020, at 7:50 AM, Neale Ranns (nranns) wrote:
>
>
>
> From: on behalf of Christian Hopps
> Date: Sunday 10 May 2020 at 14:33
> To: "Neale Ranns (nranns)"
> Cc: Christian Hopps , vpp-dev
> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
&g
From: on behalf of Christian Hopps
Date: Sunday 10 May 2020 at 14:33
To: "Neale Ranns (nranns)"
Cc: Christian Hopps , vpp-dev
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
> On May 9, 2020, at 7:23 AM, Neale Ranns via lists.fd.io
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Ch
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I did read through the Wiki and it seems that this change was motivated
>>>> by wanting to cleanup the IPsec API, but that hardly seems like
>>>> justification to eliminate the efficient use of an entire variant of
>>&
goes for their APIs too, like how do I configure what DCSP, ECN,
> > > DF to copy on encap/decap).
> > >
> > > /neale
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Could we bring back the functionality using more "acceptable to the
> > &
>
> >Thanks,
> > Chris.
> >
> >>
> >> /neale
> >>
> >>
> >> From: on behalf of Christian Hopps
> >>
> >> Date: Wednesday 6 May 2020 at 14:32
> >> To: vpp-dev
> >> Cc: Christian Hopps
> &
On May 8, 2020, at 3:57 AM, Neale Ranns via lists.fd.io
wrote:
>
>
>
> From: on behalf of Christian Hopps
> Date: Thursday 7 May 2020 at 23:27
> To: "Neale Ranns (nranns)"
> Cc: Christian Hopps , vpp-dev
> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
&
From: on behalf of Christian Hopps
Date: Thursday 7 May 2020 at 23:27
To: "Neale Ranns (nranns)"
Cc: Christian Hopps , vpp-dev
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
> On May 7, 2020, at 1:41 PM, Neale Ranns (nranns) wrote:
>
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> On
their
> APIs too, like how do I configure what DCSP, ECN, DF to copy on encap/decap).
>
> /neale
>
>
>
>Could we bring back the functionality using more "acceptable to the
> project" APIs or something?
>
>Thanks,
>Chris.
>
>&
>
> From: on behalf of Christian Hopps
> Date: Wednesday 6 May 2020 at 14:32
> To: vpp-dev
> Cc: Christian Hopps
> Subject: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
>
> Hi, vpp-dev,
>
> Post 19.08 seems to have removed IPs
t of commonly used IPsec
functionality.
Could we bring back the functionality using more "acceptable to the project"
APIs or something?
Thanks,
Chris.
>
> /neale
>
>
> From: on behalf of Christian Hopps
> Date: Wednesday 6 May 2020 at 14:32
> To: vpp-dev
>
tian Hopps mailto:cho...@chopps.org>>
> Date: Wednesday 6 May 2020 at 14:32
> To: vpp-dev mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>>
> Cc: Christian Hopps mailto:cho...@chopps.org>>
> Subject: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
>
> Hi, vpp-dev,
>
> Post 19.08 seems to ha
: vpp-dev
Cc: Christian Hopps
Subject: [vpp-dev] IPsec tunnel interfaces?
Hi, vpp-dev,
Post 19.08 seems to have removed IPsec logical interfaces.
One cannot always use transport mode IPsec.
How can I get the efficiency of route based (FIB) IPsec w/o transport mode?
Adding superfluous
Hi, vpp-dev,
Post 19.08 seems to have removed IPsec logical interfaces.
One cannot always use transport mode IPsec.
How can I get the efficiency of route based (FIB) IPsec w/o transport mode?
Adding superfluous encapsulations (wasting bandwidth) to replace this
(seemingly lost, hope not) funct
16 matches
Mail list logo
