On (12/02/15 14:01), Tom Herbert wrote: > No, please don't persist is this myopic "we'll get to IPv6 later" > model! IPv6 is a real protocol, it has significant deployment of the > Internet, and there are now whole data centers that are IPv6 only > (e.g. FB), and there are plenty of use cases of IPSEC/IPv6 that could > benefit for performance improvements just as much IPv4. This vendor > mentality that IPv6 is still not important simply doesn't help > matters. :-( Ok, I'll get you the numbers for this later, and sure, if we do this, we should solve the ipv6 problem too. BTW, the ipv6 nov3 paths have severe alignment issues. I flagged this a long time ago http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg336257.html I think all of it is triggered by mld. Someone needs to do something about that too. I dont think those paths are using NET_ALIGN very well, and I dont think this is the most wholesome thing for perf. --Sowmini -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
