Hi Ali,
I am getting another strange error so wanted to share here.
By using new JSON api, configured FV as;
fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-flowspace myflowspace1 all 1 any myslice1=6
fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-flowspace myflowspace2 all 10 tp_dst=1000
myslice2=6
It created the FlowSpaces correctly, as can be seen from "list-flowspace"
Configured Flow entries:
{"force-enqueue": -1, "name": "myflowspace1", "slice-action":
[{"slice-name": "myslice1", "permission": 6}], "queues": [], "priority": 1,
"dpid": "all_dpids", "id": 12, "match": {"wildcards": 4194303}}
{"force-enqueue": -1, "name": "myflowspace2", "slice-action":
[{"slice-name": "myslice2", "permission": 6}], "queues": [], "priority":
10, "dpid": "all_dpids", "id": 13, "match": {"wildcards": 4194175,
"tp_dst": 1000}}
When I run the controller for myslice1 it connects to sws successfully but
when I run the controller for myslice2 it gives sw-connection error for
every sw: (This following log message is just for sw_dpid: ::04)
ERROR:openflow.of_01:[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] OpenFlow Error:
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: header:
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: version: 1
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: type: 1 (OFPT_ERROR)
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: length: 84
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: xid: 0
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: type: OFPET_FLOW_MOD_FAILED (3)
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: code: OFPFMFC_EPERM (2)
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: datalen: 72
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: 0000: 01 0e 00 48 00 00 01 02 00 10 00 1f 00
00 00 00 ...H............
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: 0010: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 ................
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: 0020: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 ................
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: 0030: 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 03 00 00 00
00 80 00 ................
[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] Error: 0040: ff ff ff ff ff ff 00
00 ........
INFO:openflow.of_01:[00-00-00-00-00-04 1] connected
Connection [00-00-00-00-00-04 1]
________________________________________________________
Despite the error, sws seem to be connected to controller and slicing logic
seems to work fine.
Just wondering what might cause this error log.
Mehmet Fatih Aktas
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 8:00 PM, mehmet fatih Aktaş <mfatihak...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi Ali,
>
> Thanks for letting me know about this. I created an issue and did my best
> to follow the guidelines you sent me.
>
> I will try to use old XMLRPC API in the meantime. Thanks for writing the
> steps for that.
> Regards.
>
> Mehmet Fatih Aktas
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Ali Al-Shabibi <
> ali.al-shab...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mehmet,
>>
>> This is a bug with the new JSON api. Could you please create an issue for
>> it and I will address it ASAP.
>>
>> In the meantime, you can add your flowspace using the old XMLRPC API. To
>> do this, follow these steps:
>>
>> 0. Backup your config if you have things you don't want to lose.
>> 0.1 fvctl save-config /etc/flowvisor/config.json
>> 1. Re-enable the XMLRPC interface
>> 1.01 Stop flowvisor
>> 1.1 edit the /etc/flowvisor/config.json
>> 1.2 set api_webserver_port to 8081
>> 1.3 run fvconfig load /etc/flowvisor/config.json
>> 1.4 start flowvisor
>> 2. Add your flowspace using the fvctl-xml command.
>> 2.1 fvctl-xml --url=https://localhost:8081 addFlowSpace any 10
>> nw_dst=10.0.0.255/32 Slice:mySlice2=7
>>
>> Apologies for this, we will fix this soon. Please create an issue for
>> this on https://github.com/OPENNETWORKINGLAB/flowvisor/issues?state=openand
>> follow these steps as much as possible ->
>> https://github.com/OPENNETWORKINGLAB/flowvisor/wiki/Filing-New-Issues-or-bugs
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>> --
>> Ali
>>
>> On Apr 3, 2013, at 2:24 PM, mehmet fatih Aktaş <mfatihak...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Ali, I will try to follow another approach similar to what you
>> suggested. Your advice helped me a lot thank you very much.
>> >
>> > I have another simple question: I am configuring FV as
>> > fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-flowspace myflowspace1 all 1 any myslice1=7
>> > fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-flowspace myflowspace2 all 10 nw_dst=
>> 10.0.0.255/32 myslice2=7
>> >
>> > As far as I understand, this means the packets not matching; nw_dst=
>> 10.0.0.255/32, should not be forwarded to myslice2 but to myslice1.
>> However, again all of the packets are issued to myslice2 because of its
>> respectively high priority, I guess.
>> >
>> > Actually this behavior expected because after FV is getting configured
>> such, then I "list-flowspace" and it gives:
>> > Configured Flow entries:
>> > {"force-enqueue": -1, "name": "myflowspace1", "slice-action":
>> [{"slice-name": "myslice1", "permission": 6}], "queues": [], "priority": 1,
>> "dpid": "all_dpids", "id": 296, "match": {"wildcards": 4194303}}
>> > {"force-enqueue": -1, "name": "myflowspace2", "slice-action":
>> [{"slice-name": "myslice2", "permission": 6}], "queues": [], "priority":
>> 10, "dpid": "all_dpids", "id": 297, "match": {"wildcards": 4194303}}
>> >
>> > As this log shows, there is no difference at the "matching" fields. So
>> I think, either i am doing sth wrong with nw_dst=10.0.0.255/32 or it is
>> not working right.
>> > (Because when add another match e.g. in_port=3, it is showing this in
>> myflowspace2 match field differently from that of myflowspace1)
>> >
>> > Any help would be highly appreciated. Thanks for the time.
>> >
>> > Mehmet Fatih Aktas
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Ali Al-Shabibi <
>> ali.al-shab...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>> > [Responses inline]
>> >
>> > > After I created the slices as I wrote in the previous email; first I
>> am running controller:8002, then 3 sws are not getting connected but only
>> the sw whose dpid is added with the last flowspace entry. e.g. if the FV is
>> configured such that
>> > > fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-slice myslice1 tcp:192.168.56.1:8001 mfa
>> > > fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-slice myslice2 tcp:192.168.56.1:8002 mfa
>> > >
>> > > fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-flowspace myflowspace1 all 1 any myslice1=7
>> > > fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-flowspace myflowspace2 00:00:00:00:00:02 3
>> any myslice2=7
>> > > fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-flowspace myflowspace2 00:00:00:00:00:03 3
>> any myslice2=7
>> > > fvctl -f fvpasswd_file add-flowspace myflowspace2 00:00:00:00:00:01 3
>> any myslice2=7
>> > > Then only sw_dpid:::01 is connected to myslice2. I listed FV
>> datapaths and it is showing;
>> > > Connected switches:
>> > > 1 : 00:00:00:00:00:00:00:01
>> > > 2 : 00:00:00:00:00:00:00:02
>> > > 3 : 00:00:00:00:00:00:00:03
>> > > 4 : 00:00:00:00:00:00:00:04
>> > > So there is no connectivity problem. Also as you suggested, I traced
>> the OF packet exchanges between the sws and the controllers, but for this
>> case, the connection messages (Hello, Features Request, Set Config etc.)
>> are exchanged for only connected sw_dpid:::01.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Are you sure flowvisor is connecting dpid 0x01 to myslice2? From your
>> description I understand that initially only controller :8001 is running.
>> Therefore, FlowVisor will create a connection for dpid 0x01 to myslice1
>> only. So it is normal that you only see traffic for dpid 0x01. Does this
>> make sense to you?
>> >
>> > >
>> > > >Slicing on the dpid only will be tricky because having two entire
>> datapaths in two different slices is nearly impossible, you need some other
>> >variable to discriminate on. I don't know what kind of virtual subnets you
>> want to build, but have you considered slicing on IPs or even >vlans?
>> Another alternative which is quite simple is to slice on a combination of
>> dpids and ports.
>> > > This is a good suggestion, thanks, but what I want to have is
>> sligthly more dynamic way of slicing the network by using FlowVisor. That
>> is why I was trying to go for fine-grained manner of slicing: by specifying
>> dpids individually for each slice. Also I am not trying to slice the
>> datapath entirely here.
>> > > Do you have any idea that might be useful to achieve this type of
>> slicing else I will try to follow what you suggested, vlan or IP slicing.
>> > > Thanks.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Dpid slicing isn't very fine grained because once you allocate a dpid
>> to a slice (ie. which no other discriminant), the flowspace (and therefore
>> the slice it is in) with the highest priority will always have control of
>> that dpid. From what I can tell, VLAN or IP (or MAC) slicing is your best
>> bet here.
>> >
>> > > Mehmet Fatih Aktas
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Ali Al-Shabibi <
>> ali.al-shab...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>> > > Hi Mehmet,
>> > >
>> > > For your instability issue could you check that the connection
>> between the switches and flowvisor is stable. That'll give us a better idea
>> of where to start looking. You can verify this by running fvctl
>> list-datapaths and confirming that all 4 switches remain connected. If they
>> are always connected then you should probably capture a packet trace
>> between flowvisor and the controllers to see what is actually going on.
>> This can be done with wireshark.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Also, even though the flowspaces of myslice1&2 are successfully
>> created and all switches are getting connected successfully, FV does not
>> send the packet_ins to both slice switches but only to one e.g.
>> controller:8001.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > So flowvisor does not do this. It will only forward control traffic
>> to one slice. In your case myslice1 takes precedence because it has a
>> higher priority and matches all dpids.
>> > >
>> > > > Overall, what i am trying to do is to slice the network into
>> virtual subnets, and here i explained the problems I had during doing that.
>> What I am doing may not be the best way, I would appreciate any help or
>> comment.
>> > >
>> > > Slicing on the dpid only will be tricky because having two entire
>> datapaths in two different slices is nearly impossible, you need some other
>> variable to discriminate on. I don't know what kind of virtual subnets you
>> want to build, but have you considered slicing on IPs or even vlans?
>> Another alternative which is quite simple is to slice on a combination of
>> dpids and ports.
>> > >
>> > > Let me know if this helps.
>> > >
>> > > > Thanks for the time.
>> > > >
>> > > > Mehmet Fatih Aktas
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Ali Al-Shabibi <
>> ali.al-shab...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>> > > > Hi Mehmet,
>> > > >
>> > > > FlowVisor can reside anywhere really (within a reasonable latency),
>> so you could have it running in the mininet VM or on another machine. Just
>> point your mininet network to the FlowVisor.
>> > > >
>> > > > This can be done by giving the --controller remote option to
>> mininet. That said, I'd be interested to know what problems you had
>> installing FlowVisor.
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Is there any simple tutorial or any resource that can help me to
>> get on board quickly ?
>> > > >
>> > > > Unfortunately not yet, but I will be putting the tutorials up
>> online officially soon, although they may not be very different to the ones
>> you have found yet.
>> > > >
>> > > > Hope this helps!
>> > > >
>> > > > > Thanks.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Mehmet Fatih Aktas
>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > openflow-discuss mailing list
>> > > > > openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu
>> > > > > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
openflow-discuss mailing list
openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
