On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > This interpretation seems needlessly wasteful. It forces the switch > to keep an extra copy of the original flow match around, instead of > allowing it to convert it to an internal form and discard the > original.
Fwiw Ben, while I certainly understand your view from a switch stand point, it makes a controller writer's job much harder. Specifically, when asking "is this flow the same as the one I sent earlier" the controller has to now reverse engineer all of the switch's normalization routines before it can answer the question. Now, it's true that all of the normalization procedures make sense in retrospect, but none of which are standardized or uniform among the switches (take this thread as example). Fwiw, - Rob . _______________________________________________ openflow-discuss mailing list openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
