[ovs-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/3] vswitch.xml: Detail ipsec user interface.
Chandran, Sugesh
sugesh.chandran at intel.com
Fri May 26 10:25:55 UTC 2017
Regards
_Sugesh
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ovs-dev-bounces at openvswitch.org [mailto:ovs-dev-
> bounces at openvswitch.org] On Behalf Of Ian Stokes
> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:16 AM
> To: dev at openvswitch.org
> Subject: [ovs-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/3] vswitch.xml: Detail ipsec user
> interface.
>
> This commit adds details to the vswitch xml regarding the use of the ipsec
> interface type. This patch is not intended for upstreaming and simply seeks
> to solicit feedback on the user interface design of the ipsec port type as
> described in the vswitch.xml.
>
> This modifies the vswitch.xml with a proposed ipsec interface. It also
> provides details for the proposed interface options such as SPD creation, SA
> creation and modification, Policy entries for the SPD as well as traffic selctor
> options for the policy.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Stokes <ian.stokes at intel.com>
> ---
> vswitchd/vswitch.xml | 222
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/vswitchd/vswitch.xml b/vswitchd/vswitch.xml index
> bb66cb5..a537911 100644
> --- a/vswitchd/vswitch.xml
> +++ b/vswitchd/vswitch.xml
> @@ -2191,6 +2191,12 @@
> A pair of virtual devices that act as a patch cable.
> </dd>
>
> + <dt><code>ipsec</code></dt>
> + <dd>
> + An interface type to provide IPsec RFC4301 functionality for
> + traffic at the IP layer, initially for IPv4 environments.
[Sugesh] I am not sure how an ipsec interface works with vxlan tunneling.
The userspace tunneling send traffic to corresponding phy bridge based on tunnel address.
Now we have one more interface(ipsec) down the tunnel interface?
Can you please provide a simple diagram with ports and bridges that explain how VM to VM ipsec tunnel connection works between two hosts.
Another point is about the recirculation, does the packet need to recirculate again after the encrypt/decrypt?
> + </dd>
> +
> <dt><code>null</code></dt>
> <dd>An ignored interface. Deprecated and slated for removal in
> February 2013.</dd>
> @@ -2510,6 +2516,222 @@
> </column>
> </group>
>
> + <group title="IPsec">
> + <p>
> + Only <code>ipsec</code> interfaces support these options.
> + </p>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="spd_id" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + Must be an identifier for the SPD that is to be used by this IPsec
> + interface. If no SPD exists with this ID then it will be created.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="sa_id" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + An identifier representing the ID of a Security Association.
> + If no SA with this ID exists it will be created.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="sa_spi" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + A 32 bit number representing the security policy index for
> + the SA.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="ipsec_mode" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + The IPsec mode that applies to the SA, one of:
> + </p>
> + <ul>
> + <li>
> + <code>transport</code>: Provide protection primarily for next
> + layer protocols.
> + </li>
> + <li>
> + <code>tunnel</code>: Provide protection to IP layer also (applied
> + to tunneled IP packets).
> + </li>
> + </ul>
> + <p>
> + Initially only support for transport mode will be implemented.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="sa_protocol" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + The security protocol used for IPsec, one of the following:
> + </p>
> + <ul>
> + <li>
> + <code>ESP</code>: Encapsulating Security Payload.
> + </li>
> + <li>
> + <code>AH</code>: Authentication header
> + </li>
> + </ul>
> + <p>
> + Initially only ESP is supported, users can implement authentication
> + communication only by setting the encryption algorithm to NULL for ESP
> + but specifying the integrity algorithm. In this way there is no need
> + to support AH. If this is acceptable to the OVS community then this
> + option could be removed as it will always be ESP.
[Sugesh] I think it looks ok to me.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="crypto_alg" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + The encryption algorithm used for IPsec, one of the following:
> + </p>
> + <ul>
> + <li>
> + <code>NULL</code>: No encryption. Note NULL is required for the
> + use of ESP with authentication only which is preferred over AH
> + due to NAT traversal.
> + </li>
> + <li>
> + <code>AES_CBC</code>: AES_CBC is a non-AEAD algorithm. Note
> users
> + MUST specify an authentication algorithm to check integrity.
> + </li>
> + <li>
> + <code>AES_GCM_16</code>: An AEAD algorithm. This allows the use
> of
> + ESP with a combined mode cipher that handles encryption/decryption
> + and authentication in a single step. Recommended for performance.
> + </li>
> + </ul>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="crypto_key" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + A crypto key specifies the transformation of plaintext into cipher
> + text for the encryption algorithm. Alphanumeric user generated string.
> + IPsec sessions may have very long life time, and carry multiple
> + packets, where possible 128-bit or 256-bit keys should be used.
[Sugesh] I feel this should be a flow item. Is that possible having same SA to use
Different keys? Does openflow supports ipsec SA or SP definitions.
I remember seeing some of the proposal in Internet. Some of the vendors do support
Ipsec extension on top of openflow v1.4? Any plan on support those?
If yes, these fields can be either flow/value.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="auth_alg" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + Optional. Represents the authentication algorithm to be used for
> + IPsec. Depending on the encryption algorithm that is chosen a user
> + may have to specify a separate authentication algorithm. This
> + typically occurs when communications are encrypted with non-AEAD
> + algorithm which MUST be combined with an authentication algorithm.
> + Can be one of the following:
> + </p>
> + <ul>
> + <li>
> + <code>NULL</code>: No authentication algorithm. Must only be
> used
> + when the encryption is done with an AEAD algorithm.
> + </li>
> + <li>
> + <code>HMAC_SHA2_256_128</code>: Should be selected when a
> non AEAD
> + algorithm is used for encryption.
> + </li>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="auth_key" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + Required if an auth_alg has been specificed. An authentication key
> + specifies the transformation of plaintext into cipher text for the
> + authentication algorithm. An alphanumeric user generated string. IPsec
> + sessions may have very long life time, and carry multiple packets,
> + where possible 128-bit or 256-bit keys should be used.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="policy_priority" type='{"type":
> "integer"}'>
> + <p>
> + Represents the policy order for an entry in the SPD.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + A string representing whether the policy is applied to inbound or
> + outbound traffic. Can be one of the following:
> + </p>
> + <ul>
> + <li>
> + <code>inbound</code>
> + </li>
> + <li>
> + <code>outbound</code>
> + </li>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="policy_action" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + The policy action to take. Can be one of the following:
> + </p>
> + <ul>
> + <li>
> + <code>bypass</code>: IPsec transformation is not applied to
> + traffic and traffic continues as normal.
> + </li>
> + <li>
> + <code>discard</code>: Traffic is dropped.
> + </li>
> + <li>
> + <code>protect</code>: An IPsec transformation is applied to the
> + traffic. Note if action is 'protect' then the policy_sa option
> + must also be specified.
> + </li>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="policy_sa" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + Required if the action for a policy is protect. The policy_sa should
> + match an sa_id specified which contains the correct transformations.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="ts_local_ip_range"
> + type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + Optional. This represents the range of local IP addresses for the
> + traffic selector to examine a packet for. Should be in the form of
> + <code> start_ip_addr - end_ip_addr </code>
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="ts_remote_ip_range"
> + type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + Optional. This represents the range of remote IP addresses for the
> + traffic selector to examine a packet for. Should be in the form of
> + <code> start_ip_addr - end_ip_addr </code>
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="ts_protocol" type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + Optional. This represents the traffic selector next layer protocol
> + identifier to examine for before taking action.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="ts_local_port_range"
> + type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + Optional. This represents the range of local port ranges for the
> + traffic selector to examine a packet for.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + <column name="options" key="ts_remote_port_range"
> + type='{"type": "string"}'>
> + <p>
> + This represents the range of remote port range for the traffic selector
> + to examine a packet for.
> + </p>
> + </column>
> +
> + </group>
> +
> <group title="MTU">
> <p>
> The MTU (maximum transmission unit) is the largest amount of data
[Sugesh] Another monor suggestion is I would like to see, how its looks like for the ovs-vsctl command?
May be its nice to have mention it in the commit message. Not very important though.
> --
> 1.7.0.7
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at openvswitch.org
> https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
More information about the dev
mailing list