On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 03:26:38PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 04:37:47PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > The intention is that, as each OpenFlow 1.1 feature is added to Open
> > vSwitch, the corresponding protocol definitions will be broken up this way:
> >
> > - Definitions that are the same in OF1.0 and OF1.1 will retain the "OFP"
> > or "ofp" prefix and move to openflow-common.h.
> >
> > - Definitions that are specific to OF1.0 will be renamed with an "OFP10"
> > or "ofp10" prefix and stay in openflow-1.0.h.
> >
> > - Definitions that are specific to OF1.1 will be renamed with an "OFP11"
> > or "ofp11" prefix and move to openflow-1.1.h.
>
> I am wondering how a hypothetical definition that is shared by OF1.1
> and OF1.2 but not OF1.0 might be shared. It may or may not conflict
> with a OF1.0 definition.
>
> I don't have anything in particular in mind, but as more OF versions are
> added it seems like a plausible scenario.
I've thought about that a little too. I don't have a completely general
solution in mind. One thought, however, is that OF1.1 and OF1.2 are
much more compatible than OF1.0 and OF1.1. So, I'm sort of inclined
toward the following as a starting point:
- Common to all versions: OFP_.
- OF1.0 only: OFP10_.
- OF1.1 only, or OF1.1 and OF1.2: OFP11_.
- OF1.2 only: OFP12_.
Thoughts?
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
