ah, sorry, i didnt realise you were running VMs and wanted them on the
same network. youll definitely need veb and vport in this situation.
Well, I can't figure out any other use case where vxlan(4) is useful,
other than connecting VMs to the same subnet (e.g. 192.168.3.0/24)
but hosted on different sites (PublicIP1, PublicIP2, ...).
Actually, I use vxlan for another scenario.
I implemented some point-to-point tunnels with vxlan where the
2 endpoints are NATed by the 2 domestic routers. In my case, routers
support NAT only for UDP and TCP, not GRE or any other tunneling
protocol. The normal way in this scenario would be with IKEv2 or wireguard,
but I do it with vxlan only because I don't need encryption on the
p2p tunnels, that should be considered as an exception, not the best practice.
> I see that OpenBSD set the same port as the Destination Port,
> that is, 4789 for every outcoming packets.
>
> Do you think it's possible to optimize in this way?
yes, but there are more useful optimisations that are a higher priority
for me to do first. ecmp for vxlan in our stack isnt going to give you a
speed increase today.
Ok, I see
No comments:
Post a Comment