Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) replied on github web page:
include/odp/api/spec/ipsec.h
line 118
@@ -983,9 +983,55 @@ typedef struct odp_ipsec_op_flag_t {
* These may be used to override some SA level options
*/
typedef struct odp_ipsec_out_opt_t {
+ /** Union of all flag bits */
+ union {
+ /** Option flags. Set flag for those options that are
+ * used, all other options are ignored. */
+ struct {
+ /** Use fragmentation mode option */
+ uint32_t frag_mode: 1;
+
+ /** Use IP parameters option */
+ uint32_t ip_param: 1;
+
+ /** Use TFC padding length option */
+ uint32_t tfc_pad: 1;
+
+ /** Tunnel mode TFC dummy packet. In tunnel mode, set
Comment:
Hmm. I think RFC 4303 does not limit TFC dummy packets to tunnel mode. One can
generate them in transport mode.
> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
> What is the use case for these options?
>> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
>> There is one indeed.
>>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>>> Is there no need for a corresponding `chksums_out` capability?
>>>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>>>> I assume this is referring to the `odp_packet_has_ipv4()` and
>>>> `odp_packet_has_ipv6()` accessor functions? Since these bits are only
>>>> accessible via these functions, this forces applications to play a
>>>> guessing game with them and their L4 counterparts. Might it be better to
>>>> consider having `odp_packet_l3_proto()` and `odp_packet_l4_proto()`
>>>> functions?
>>>>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>>>>> Can `flabel` be placed after `dst_addr`? This would avoid the pad bytes
>>>>> that would otherwise be inserted between `dspc` and `flabel`.
https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/403#discussion_r162514212
updated_at 2018-01-19 01:04:54
