On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 08:36:57PM -0500, Bertrand Bonnefoy-Claudet wrote: > Here is a minor point in the OpenFlow 1.3.1 specification (and most > previous versions) that I would like to clarify. > > Page 42 says that ports are numbered starting from 1 and that OFPP_MAX > is the maximum number of "normal" ports a switch can have. > > Page 88, on the other hand, says that a valid physical port should > have a number "< OFPP_MAX". > > So, to my understanding, page 42 implies OFPP_MAX is a valid port > whereas page 88 implies the contrary.
This sounds like a mistake. I imagine that it arose because the earliest versions of OpenFlow numbered ports starting from 0. The intent is that port numbers are greater than 0 and less than OFPP_MAX. _______________________________________________ openflow-discuss mailing list openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
