On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:29:50AM -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Dan McDonald wrote: > > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~danmcd/detangle/ > > Two minor comments: > > ip.c: > > 12771: if we hit this condition (IP and UDP headers in separate mblks), > it looks like we'll never check for ESP-in-UDP because we'll never call > ip_udp_check(). We'll be kicked over to the "slow path" and directly to > ip_fanout_udp() without passing go.
ip_fanout_udp() calls ip_fanout_udp_conn(), where we ALSO have a zero_spi_check(). (In fact, it's this function's path that had an IRE reference leak until VERY recently.) You bring up, however, a good point that I need to possibly pullup further in zero_spi_check(). > 17453,17455: did you mean ESP-in-UDP? I sure did. Thanks! Both webrevs are now being updated. They should be ready by the time most people receive this e-mail. Dan _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
