Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/5] bridge: per vlan lwt and dst_metadata support

From: Jiri Benc <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:51:30 +0100

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:08:05 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 06:46:51AM CET, [email-masked] wrote:
> >Other approaches tried and vetoed:
> >- tc vlan push/pop and tunnel metadata dst:
> >    - posses a tc rule scalability problem (2 rules per vni)
> 
> Why it is a problem?

Wanted to ask exactly the same question.

> >    - cannot handle the case where a packet needs to be replicated to
> >      multiple vxlan remote tunnel end-points.. which the vxlan driver
> >      can do today by having multiple remote destinations per fdb.
> 
> Can't you just extend the tc to support this?

+1

> To me, looks like the tc is the correct place to hangle this. Then, the
> user can use it for multiple cases of forwarding, including bridge,
> tc-mirred, ovs and others. Putting this in bridge somehow seems wrong in
> this light. Also, the bridge code is polluted enough as it is. I this we
> should be super-picky to add another code there.

Completely agreed.

 Jiri