That's right, but Andre does not want use Barrier. From my point of view the barrier messages are suitable in most cases, but I have a feeling that one more cycle for control plane might be a burden for weak cpu.
-- Stas On 2 Jan 2016 10:25 am, "Justin Pettit" <jpet...@gmail.com> wrote: > That's true, but to know that it completed without an error, you can send > a barrier message to know that the switch fully processed the request. > > --Justin > > > On Jan 1, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Stas Kozlov <mancubu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi > > This duty should be done by controller. In case a flow can not be modified > or added a switch response with error message. In case message was > delivered tcp.ack will be generated according tcp flow. Controller may > handle both events. > > Faithfully yours > Stas > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2016 17:46:52 +0000 > > From: Andr? Mantas <andremant...@gmail.com> > > To: openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu, > > "openflow-supp...@lists.stanford.edu" > > <openflow-supp...@lists.stanford.edu> > > Subject: [openflow-discuss] Positive ACK > > Message-ID: > > < > cap-yg6ojhksvwc32ynt_d3yhgh-0o-v2yrxmv5eo5h0ohwy...@mail.gmail.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > > Hello. > > > > Are there any plans to include the possibility of having per-message > > positive ACK in OpenFlow? (e.g., a flag in a flow mod that tells the > switch > > to send an ack when it receives/processes the flow mod message). > > > > I know this can be done with the use of barriers, but I think it would be > > better to have some option to achieve this without using a barrier per > > message. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
