On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 07:49:35AM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2013, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:08:07AM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > > Convert the SCTP state table, so that it is more readable.
> > > Change the states to be according to the diagram in RFC 2960
> > > and add more states suitable for middle box. Still, such
> > > change in states adds incompatibility if systems in sync
> > > setup include this change and others do not include it.
> > >
> > > With this change we also have proper transitions in INPUT-ONLY
> > > mode (DR/TUN) where we see packets only from client. Now
> > > we should not switch to 10-second CLOSED state at a time
> > > when we should stay in ESTABLISHED state.
> > >
> > > The short names for states are because we have 16-char space
> > > in ipvsadm and 11-char limit for the connection list format.
> > > It is a sequence of the TCP implementation where the longest
> > > state name is ESTABLISHED.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
> > Hi Julian,
> > I am having trouble applying the first ip_vs_proto_sctp.c hunk.
> > I have tried against net-next, nf-next and ipvs-next.
> > Could you rebase it on the later and repost it with the second patch of
> > this series?
> I forgot to mention that this patchset follows the
> "ipvs: sloppy TCP and SCTP" change from Alexander Frolkin
> posted on June 13. Our plans are for following list:
> 1. ipvs: sloppy TCP and SCTP (posted by Alexander and acked by me)
> 2. ipvs: provide iph to schedulers (just applied by you)
> 3. SH changes by Alexander (to be posted officially) depend
> on 1 and 2 while SCTP patchset by me depends only on 1.
> 4. Changes to sync only persistent conns (only in my head - TODO)
> Let me know if you can apply (1) to -next before the
> SCTP patchset (its patch 2+3), it does not collide with (2),
> I think.
Thanks, and sorry for being a bit slow.
Pablo has accepted patch 1 into his nf tree via my ipvs tree.
At this stage I expect it to show up in net and v3.10.
I have queued-up the remaining patches that you list above to
ipvs-next and pushed it. I'll send a pull request to Pablo in
the not to distant future.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html