sowmini.varadhan at sun.com wrote: >> sowmini.varadhan at Sun.COM wrote: >>>> Agreed, but can we do #3 without essentially getting rid of ip_newroute >>>> (at least making ip_newroute return an ire) and as a result have to >>>> rewhack the MULTIRT loops? >>> How so? ip_newroute itself has some of the MULTIRT loops :-( >> I don't understand your question. > > I meant the following: in the past, when I have tried to think about > doing this in a surya-like manner (where the ip_newroute() call from > ip_rput_noire() was changed so that it gets back an incomplete ire > but still continues on), things always get sticky because of > ipsec, cgtp etc. The forwarding path was easier to massage because > many of these features (e.g., cgtp) were not pertinent to the forwarding > path. > > So I was trying to understand your proposal for having ip_newroute > return an ire and having the caller continue on with that ire.
My proposal is a bit larger scale - do IP datapath refactoring. http://jurassic.sfbay.sun.com/~nordmark/ip-datapath-design.pdf Erik
