Dear Kyriakos, Thanks for your quickly help. Last week, I found in lib/packet have some files, such as arp or icmp. That time, I think may not follow them to do similar thing. But after your explanation, I think we are wrong and must to do it. The other thing is we also record which ports contain vedio streaming, is it right?
Thanks Jen-Wei On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Kyriakos Zarifis <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi, > > although that would take some effort, it is perfectly doable to hold that > information on your component. You wouldn't have to use v1.1 tables or > anything like that, all the state would be on your controller. While there > are several packet types of packets included in the packet parsing library > of NOX, IGMP messages are unfortunately one of them. So in order to extract > the Join/Leave Group information, you would have to parse them manually (or > add a relevant igmp.py in lib/packet/, following the paradigm of the other > packet classes. such an addition would be welcome). > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Jen-Wei Hu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Dear Murphy & KK, >> >> Thanks for your kindly reply and help. Just like KK mentioned, we might >> need an IGMP multicast. So, in this point, we must do something on NOX. That >> is, we need to implement a data structure that do the same thing as Group >> table for recording which ports have IGMP request. Is is right, please clear >> me! >> >> Thanks >> >> Jen-Wei >> >> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 9:22 AM, kk yap <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Jen-Wei, >>> >>> OpenFlow 1.1 (implemented) is released, so it is quite final for me. >>> >>> Also, if you are not constrained to using the group semantics (in >>> OpenFlow 1.1), you can do multicast by listing all the ports you want >>> to multicast to in the flow_mod command. >>> >>> If you are looking for IGMP multicast support, then you are looking >>> for someone to do some work. >>> >>> Regards >>> KK >>> >>> On 27 March 2011 17:41, James "Murphy" McCauley <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > So this is certainly not an official statement of any sort, but I would >>> > not expect to see OpenFlow 1.1 support in NOX for a while. I believe >>> > there's some consensus that supporting both 1.0 and 1.1 well will >>> > require some nontrivial API changes (and we're due for some API changes >>> > anyway), and there will be a focus on getting some of that right rather >>> > than incrementally updating NOX as has been done for previous OpenFlow >>> > versions. >>> > >>> > And before we even have 1.1 compatibility, I really would not hazard a >>> > guess about what we'd be releasing supporting multicast. Sorry! >>> > >>> > Hopefully we'll have more of an idea about this in the coming months, >>> as >>> > well as more actual OpenFlow 1.1 implementations. >>> > >>> > (Also, as far as my limited understanding goes, OpenFlow 1.1 is still >>> > not final...) >>> > >>> > -- Murphy >>> > >>> > On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 11:33 +0800, Jen-Wei Hu wrote: >>> >> Hi all, >>> >> >>> >> We are glad to hear the version 1.1 of OpenFlow is released because >>> >> this version create a Group table for supporting multicast. Although >>> >> we use the NOX that support OpenFlow 1.0, would any plan to develop an >>> >> application or example which supports multicast? Or give us >>> >> some advices to do it? Thank you! >>> >> >>> >> Bests, >>> >> >>> >> Jen-Wei >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> nox-dev mailing list >>> >> [email protected] >>> >> http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > nox-dev mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev >>> > >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nox-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev >> >> >
_______________________________________________ nox-dev mailing list [email protected] http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev
