Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] ipvs: replace the SCTP state machine

To: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] ipvs: replace the SCTP state machine
Cc: lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:49:35 +0300 (EEST)

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.

> I will take the first patch and see about getting it included in v3.10.


Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>