[WLANware] GSoC 2010: Project IP/UDP encapsulation Kernel module

[marco bonola]

Hi,

>But I think this learning of which tunnel to choose should be also
>done automatically. Like switches are doing it. You do not need to
>preconfigure which port switch will use to send a packet.
I agree, and in fact, the learning process update the forwarding table
automatically ( I guess I didn't specify that in the proposal :) ).
I think that there are scenarios in which you have the tunnel
established with a node, but you don't know the (inner - virtual) address
of the node that established the tunnel (it is a matter of the specific
signaling protocol used in the tunnel negotiation). In this case, you need
an explicit rule for the node initiating the flow, while the "responder" can
still automatically update the forwarding table.

>We should also not forget about broadcast (at least).
Yes. I think there will be no problem.

>When we are talking about IPinUDP we are talking about both IPv4 and
>IPv6? And also UDP will be both over IPv4 and IPv6?
I was thinking of starting considering only IPv4. Anyway, this is a good
point, and I don't
see big problems in extending the module to support IPv6 (for both
encapsulation
headers and inner packets).
Anyway, in my defense, I think it is reasonable to start supporting only v4
because:

1- (as for the inner packets) not all applications are supposed to have IPv6
support
2- (as for the tunnel header) few ISPs provide IPv6 connectivity.


Marco


On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Mitar <mmitar at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:56 PM, marco bonola <marco.bonola at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Now, I'm doing this because I considered a more complex scenario.
>
> I agree. It is necessary to consider also complex scenarios. It is
> always then possible not to use it. But it is harder to add it later.
> I think it is good that it is possible to fix which tunnel to use for
> a given inner packet specification.
>
> But I think this learning of which tunnel to choose should be also
> done automatically. Like switches are doing it. You do not need to
> preconfigure which port switch will use to send a packet. It learns by
> itself. And something like this should be also possible here. (Next to
> the possibility of manually specifying the port/tunnel.)
>
> We should also not forget about broadcast (at least).
>
> When we are talking about IPinUDP we are talking about both IPv4 and
> IPv6? And also UDP will be both over IPv4 and IPv6?
>
>
> Mitar
> _______________________________________________
> WLANware mailing list
> WLANware at freifunk.net
> Abonnement abbestellen? -> https://freifunk.net/mailman/listinfo/wlanware
>
> Weitere Infos zu den freifunk.net Mailinglisten und zur An- und Abmeldung
> unter http://freifunk.net/mailinglisten
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.freifunk.net/pipermail/wlanware-freifunk.net/attachments/20100415/993bfde0/attachment.html>