I've been catching up a bit on the patches and discussion going on, so
please excuse my late reply. Please see my inline question.
On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 12:47:46PM -0700, Mat Martineau wrote:
Hello everyone -
In our recent web conference call, we thought it would be helpful to
summarize what is coming up for MPTCP upstreaming. To start, I'd like to
review work that's already been done and is underway.
* Mat developed an extensible TCP option framework patch, and Christoph
refactored upstream TCP-MD5 and SMC functionality to use it. The idea was to
integrate some extensions in to TCP that had utility for existing
functionality, but would also help integrate MPTCP. This RFC patch set was
turned down by Dave Miller, but did give us useful guidance.
* Mat published a proposal for optionally extending sk_buff shared info to
carry MPTCP metadata.
* Christoph keeps the multipath-tcp.org
kernel merged with recent kernel
releases as part of his maintainership role for the multipath-tcp.org
project, and is refactoring parts of the MPTCP implementation to take
advantage of newer kernel or TCP features and to align with upstreaming
* Rao has published an RFC patch set based on the multipath-tcp.org
implementation and the current upstream kernel, with modifications to make
the TCP implementation extensible in a way that's useful for MPTCP. It is
currently under review by community members.
* Matthieu has sent a generic netlink patch set to mptcp-dev.
* Ossama shared a generic netlink path management API proposal. The Intel
group developed this before we knew Matthieu would be sharing an
* Stephan shared a userspace path manager draft implementation at
* Peter and Mat are preparing a patch set showing an MPTCP architecture with
a separate socket type for the MPTCP connection and using in-kernel TCP
sockets for subflows. The extended sk_buff structure patch is part of this.
* Ossama has made significant progress on a userspace path manager
implementation with the goal to open source it
That gives us quite a bit to discuss and review on the list in the near
term. The bigger and longer-term challenge is to take these pieces and
develop a strategy and patches for upstream submissions.
There are a few things the MPTCP upstreaming community members on this list
seem aligned on:
* MPTCP belongs in the upstream kernel
* The multipath-tcp.org
implementation is not upstream-ready as-is
* Implementing 100% from scratch is not the preferred strategy
How do we get to upstreamable patch sets from here? I think if we can agree
on what an upstreamable MPTCP architecture looks we can evaluate patch sets
accordingly. I've proposed these design characteristics before, but the
mailing list has expanded significantly since then:
* MPTCP is used when requested by the application, either through an
IPPROTO_MPTCP parameter to socket() or by using the new ULP (Upper Layer
I'm curious why this is listed as a strategy for upstreaming. It sounds
like the only way to create a userspace MPTCP socket would be the calls:
sk = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_MPTCP)
sk = socket(AF_INET6, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_MPTCP)
Whereas most TCP users use
sk = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0)
sk = socket(AF_INET6, SOCK_STREAM, 0)
sk = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP)
sk = socket(AF_INET6, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP)
Isn't part of the goal of MPTCP to be compatible with unmodified
applications? Requiring IPPROTO_MPTCP means that existing TCP apps won't
benefit from MPTCP.
Or is this simply an initial strategy for getting into the mainline, with
the hopes of making MPTCP the default for TCP apps later on?
* Move away from meta-sockets, treating each subflow more like a regular TCP
connection. The overall MPTCP connection is coordinated by an upper layer
socket that is distinct from tcp_sock.
* Move functionality to userspace where possible, like tracking ADD_ADDRs
received, initiating new subflows, or accepting new subflows.
* Avoid adding locks to coordinate access to data that's shared between
subflows. Utilize capabilities like compare-and-swap (cmpxchg), atomics, and
RCU to deal with shared data efficiently.
Are these the right place to start? Anyone want to expand the list?
mptcp mailing list