> On 18 Mar 2023, at 01:04, Numan Siddique <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 11:36 AM Abhiram Sangana
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> This patch adds support to commit connections dropped/rejected by
>> ACLs to the connection tracking table. Dropped connections are
>> committed to conntrack only if NB_Global options:ct_commit_acl_drop
>> is set to true (false by default) and ACL dropping/rejecting the
>> connection has label configured. The dropped connections are
>> committed in a separate conntrack zone so that they can be managed
>> independently and do not interact with the connection tracking state
>> of allowed connections.
>> 
>> This provides a new approach to identify connections dropped by ACLs
>> besides the existing ACL logging and drop sampling approaches.
>> 
>> Each logical switch is assigned a new conntrack zone for committing
>> dropped flows. The zone is loaded into register MFF_LOG_ACL_DROP_ZONE.
>> A new lflow action "ct_commit_drop" is introduced that commits flows
>> to connection tracking table in a zone identified by
>> MFF_LOG_ACL_DROP_ZONE register. An ACL with "drop" or "reject" action
>> and non-empty label translates to include "ct_commit_drop" in its
>> actions instead of simply dropping/rejecting the packet.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Abhiram Sangana <[email protected]>
> 

Hi Numan,

Thanks for reviewing the patch.

> Hi Abhiram,
> 
> Sorry for the delays in the reviews.
> 
> Overall the patch looks good to me.
> 
> I do have a few comments and suggestions.
> 
> Instead of adding a global option, how about an option per ACL (in the
> ACL options column) ?
> Users can enable or disable conntrack commit per ACL.

Sure, will do that.

> 
> Are you going to use this feature all the time in your deployment ?
> Or enable it only when debugging an issue ?
> If you want to enable it during debugging,  is it a bit of a hassle to
> enable the ct_commit option for the interested ACL ?

Yes, we are planning to use this feature all the time in our deployment.
So, it shouldn't be an issue to enable ct_commit option for interested ACLs.

> 
> I'm a little bit concerned with allocating a zone id for each logical
> switch even if there are no ACLs configured with this option.
> But I think it's not a big deal.

Yes, I did try to look into allocating CT zone on an as-needed basis but
had some difficulty implementing it. Will try to explore further in a
subsequent patch.

Thanks,
Abhiram

> 
> Thanks
> Numan

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to