From: Sowmini Varadhan Subject: Re: ipsec impact on performance Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 16:12:01 -0500 Message-ID: <20151202211201.GD15262@oracle.com> References: <20151201175953.GC21252@oracle.com> <20151201183720.GE21252@oracle.com> <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CBE0ED7@AcuExch.aculab.com> <20151202121156.GK23178@oracle.com> <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CBE0F39@AcuExch.aculab.com> <20151202205028.GB15262@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Laight , Linux Kernel Network Developers , "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" , Rick Jones To: Tom Herbert Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On (12/02/15 13:07), Tom Herbert wrote: > That's easy enough to add to flow dissector, but is SPI really > intended to be used an L4 entropy value? We would need to consider the yes. To quote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_Parameter_Index "This works like port numbers in TCP and UDP connections. What it means is that there could be different SAs used to provide security to one connection. An SA could therefore act as a set of rules." > effects of running multiple TCP connections over an IPsec. Also, you > might want to try IPv6, the flow label should provide a good L4 hash > for RPS/RFS, it would be interesting to see what the effects are with > IPsec processing. (ESP/UDP could also if RSS/ECMP is critical) IPv6 would be an interesting academic exercise, but it's going to be a while before we get RDS-TCP to go over IPv6. --Sowmini