From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 29 03:22:18 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 488A56D1; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 03:22:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com (mail-wi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA18130F; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 03:22:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wiaa2 with SMTP id a2so80695653wia.0; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 20:22:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=WiGfKKt3bQEJUMRqq06TKUDQam9b1ls4z4MjSg5QHzU=; b=AHjC5QLlNlhFHk2pnM+lTt7LIZb2byigRr5qEe9NzN9Ktp7lKhBAZDy6vwg6dgoGL+ eB9A1a9Txyk85K9cHxn5k6jmHoeeqI5Zehk8qARYjY3XugClQ+FLV6x76a4z3vho+r3/ YtKNuiyHxnXH1gMUbt5bRGIE+x5ana59VuuwH+39B2CY8PQgUG6yi9sK5jXouc65WrlE B24+a3UbOzQuDVnM4jme+moRWCZrt3qqmYCZnU7VZrOaks2v9dtD3Uo0v5I0qB/ghvIr blZNaorDCHiyzZrpSVlDuTymj/wQMdPCtQS+z7X3wd44Q8EpKes4zqsY32X0PFBCTe3/ uvYQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.47.201 with SMTP id f9mr49488265wjn.17.1427599336412; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 20:22:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.27.77.215 with HTTP; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 20:22:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150329011534.GH51048@funkthat.com> References: <201503271326.t2RDQxd3056112@svn.freebsd.org> <20150328083443.GV64665@FreeBSD.org> <20150328172313.GC51048@funkthat.com> <20150328181833.GX64665@FreeBSD.org> <20150328204333.GF51048@funkthat.com> <20150328213403.GB74532@zxy.spb.ru> <20150329011534.GH51048@funkthat.com> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 23:22:16 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r280759 - head/sys/netinet From: Benjamin Kaduk To: John-Mark Gurney Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 Cc: "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , Gleb Smirnoff , Slawa Olhovchenkov , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" , Fabien Thomas X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 03:22:18 -0000 On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 9:15 PM, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote this message on Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 00:34 +0300: > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 01:43:33PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > > > In this case may be do range allocation of ID (per-CPU)? > > For example, allocate 128 ID, not one ID? > > Do you mean what to do in the case of an atomic packet? > > Per RFC: > In atomic datagrams, the IPv4 ID field has no meaning; thus, it can > be set to an arbitrary value, i.e., the requirement for non-repeating > IDs within the source address/destination address/protocol tuple is > no longer required for atomic datagrams: > > You can just set it to 0, or any value we feel like. > My reading was to give each CPU its own range from which to allocate IDs, to guarantee that there are no collisions between CPUs. -Ben