Hi, Ole.
Thank you for update. I have do quick browse on the source code of
"punt socket", but what is your consider about supporting VRF?
BR/Lollita Liu
-----Original Message-----
From: Ole Troan [mailto:otr...@employees.org]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2018 6:35 PM
To: Lollita Liu <lollita....@ericsson.com>
Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] FW: method for forward pacekt between vpp and kernel
Lollita,
> We are plan to implement application based on VPP with following
> architecture. The application is running on container. All traffic will be
> received by physical NIC take over by VPP via DPDK. Data plane traffic will
> be handled by nodes developed by ourselves, and control plane traffic should
> be sent to or from Linux socket.
> <image001.png>
>
> Looks there are plenty of method on VPP can forward traffic with Kernel:
> • Using tuntap with: enable tuntap in startup.conf and configure “set
> punt udp”
> It works, but only packet received from interface belong to IP table 0 will
> be send to Linux. VRF is not supported by tuntap. What is t
> • Using stn plugin. UDP packet can not handle by VPP but match STN rule
> will be sent to Linux via tap interface, but the ethernet header is
> hardcoded. The packet is able be captured by tcpdump, but will not arrive on
> socket layer. Looks it is been droped because of wrong MAC address. Then what
> is the use case of stn?
> • Using ip punt redirect via tap device. We have do simple test on it
> and looks vpp is plan to send arp to kernel via node ip4-arp. I just want
> check what is the standard use case of “ip punt redirect”? Is there any
> standard sample based on punt redirect?
>
> In general, we have another question, is there any other method can fulfill
> our requirement with VRF support in vpp?
The short answer is of course "it depends".
If you want an unchanged Linux application you get into the issues of mirroring
each VPP interface into Linux and having the same IP address / MAC address be
used both in VPP and in Linux.
And you can make hacks around those issues NAT or MAC NAT. I wouldn't go down
this path.
On the other hand if you can change the application, then you could have a
single punt socket. Currently we have base implementation in:
https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/6721/
It supports meta-data, which allows the control plane application to set
outgoing interface, and next-node (ip4-lookup, ip6-lookup or interface-output).
It's currently limited to UDP applications, but I have been thinking of
extending it to any type of control traffic. No limitation in what you can send.
We have also been thinking of extending it to using the memif interface for
higher performance than Unix domain sockets. Patches are welcome!
Cheers,
Ole
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links:
You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#8385): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/8385
View All Messages In Topic (3): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/topic/13272190
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/13272190/21656
New Topic: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/post
Change Your Subscription: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/editsub/21656
Group Home: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev
Contact Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Terms of Service: https://lists.fd.io/static/tos
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
