On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:34:59AM -0800, Justin Pettit wrote: > Let two consenting transport nodes choose how they want to talk; we > don't need to be so prescriptive in the supported encap types for OVN. > > Signed-off-by: Justin Pettit <jpet...@nicira.com>
I agree. Database constraints should not hold us back from a discussion of the evolving nature of consent. The documentation of "encap" in ovn(5) previously benefited from a list of possible encapsulations generated automatically from the schema. With this commit, that will no longer be the case, so I would update ovn.xml to list the encapsulations that we have thought about supporting. I think that Geneve needs to be on the list. Acked-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
