Hi,

What is the motivation for hop-by-hop routing?  Does seems novel in
some aspects.

Regards
KK

On 24 February 2010 13:52, Martin Casado <[email protected]> wrote:
> From Natasha:
>
> "I'm wondering if maybe the server is showing up on hpsw3, and so the packet
> is first getting routed there, and then re-routed again when it reaches
> hpsw1. This is probably a result of all the authenticator code commented out
> that was making it depend on routing.  It's in a couple places (wherever the
> word "routing" is used)."
>
> This is likely the culprit.  Currently Nox 0.6 is doing hop-by-hop routing
> rather then setting up the full path.  Can you search for routing_mode in
> authenticator.hh, authenticator_modify.cc and authenticator_util.cc,
> uncomment the code and see if this fixes the problem?
>
>> I notice that the routing module is behaving differently with NOX0.6
>> causing each switch en route to generate independent packet_ins, while
>> NOX0.4 generates only 1 packet_in. This behavior incurs higher flow
>> setup time.
>>
>> I have a topology of client <-> hpsw3 <-> hpsw1 <-> server . I
>> performed a wget operation from client to server. Following is the
>> control traffic sent/received by the controller (Timestamp was what my
>> tcpdump captured):
>>
>>    1266984715.446715   PACKET_IN   hpsw3
>>    1266984715.446895   FLOW_MOD    hpsw3
>>    1266984715.446936   PACKET_OUT  hpsw3
>>
>>    1266984715.452756   PACKET_IN   hpsw1
>>    1266984715.452913   FLOW_MOD    hpsw1
>>    1266984715.452937   PACKET_OUT  hpsw1
>>
>> Ideally, I would've expected to see the controller to push out the
>> second FLOW_MOD soon enough (and not 6 ms after the PACKET_OUT).
>>
>> When I use NOX0.4, the action sequence is:
>>    1266987591.116579    PACKET_IN    hpsw3
>>    1266987591.116725    FLOW_MOD     hpsw3
>>    1266987591.116755    FLOW_MOD     hpsw1
>>    1266987591.116787    PACKET_OUT   hpsw3
>>
>> Any idea if there is a code change?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Srini.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nox-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nox-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org
>

_______________________________________________
nox-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org

Reply via email to