Shuva, there is something weird here: if I configure flows via RPC and then I restart OF channel, the flows disappear from operational, I do not think this is good so this is why I opened a bug. Also personally I do not like the idea of not seen all flows present in the switch in the operational DS but that is another discussion.
BR/Luis > On Nov 29, 2016, at 7:22 PM, Shuva Jyoti Kar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Luis Gomez [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 4:24 AM > To: Shuva Jyoti Kar > Cc: Anil Vishnoi; [email protected] > Subject: Re: OF Reconciliation > > Extremely sorry Luis, had marked your email to reply, but failed to do so, my > bad :( > > If we are using rpc to provision a flow, the flowid would be present in the > device flow registry, hence you would get it in the operDS. > But if we go and provision a flow in the switch (using cli/switch restconf > etc) you would not. > This was changed as a part of Bug 6917 > (https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/47138/) since we were ending up in a > race between provisioning and stats polling. > > thanks > -shuva > > > So I guess this is a bug if nobody can explain the new behavior: > > https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7268 > > I also reported another bug earlier this week about reporting flows in > operational: > > https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7258 > > BR/Luis > > >> On Nov 27, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Luis Gomez <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Thanks Shuva, I will also test myself to see how this works :) >> >> BTW, when testing reconciliation I saw one difference between Beryllium and >> Boron/Carbon: When a switch connects to controller, flows that are not >> matched in config DS are shown in operational DS (with alien ID) with the >> former but skipped from operational DS with the later. Is this expected >> behavior? I am asking because as a user or application I would be interested >> in knowing all flows in the switch regardless if controller has pushed them >> or can match them. Another side effect of this is that if you push a flow >> via RPC (like l2switch does) and then you restart the OF channel, the flow >> does not show anymore in operational which is kind of weird behavior. >> >> BR/Luis >> >> >>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 10:29 PM, Shuva Jyoti Kar >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I havenot tested this feature post the blueprint migration, need to >>> experiment around a bit. Will get back to you >>> >>> Thanks >>> Shuva >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Luis Gomez [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 11:34 PM >>> To: Shuva Jyoti Kar >>> Cc: Anil Vishnoi; [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] Bugzilla components for OpenFlow Plugin? >>> >>> Yes, and it seems to work with the basic test I performed, I will be adding >>> a robot test for it shortly. >>> >>> Second question is how do I enable this feature before the controller >>> starts for the first time? do I have to create an XML file [1] as Alexis >>> suggested? If so can you send an example and the exact location of the file? >>> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/opendaylight/openflowplugin/blob/master/applications/forwardingrules-manager/src/main/resources/org/opendaylight/blueprint/forwardingrules-manager.xml#L10-L11 >>> >>>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 9:39 AM, Shuva Jyoti Kar >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Stale marking on the controller-side is implemented as adding/removing any >>>> flows that were modified while the switch was disconnected. >>>> >>>> From: Luis Gomez [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:51 PM >>>> To: Shuva Jyoti Kar >>>> Cc: Anil Vishnoi; [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] Bugzilla components for OpenFlow Plugin? >>>> >>>> Ok, I guess I was confused here, I thought the stale-marking functionality >>>> [1] would delete any switch existing flow not matched in config DS but >>>> instead it would add/remove any flow modified while the switch was >>>> disconnected [1]. If this is correct and works, it is sufficient for me as >>>> I am looking at the OF channel disconnect/connect use case. >>>> >>>> [1] https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4062 >>>> >>>> BR/Luis >>>> >>>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 7:47 AM, Shuva Jyoti Kar >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Correct Anil. It guarantees that all flows in the config DS are pushed to >>>> the switch. >>>> >>>> The switch always starts up clean (unless it’s a TCP >>>> disconnect/reconnect). So in case we need differential reconciliation – we >>>> either can have a config parameter for the same, or augment the flow model >>>> with a flag that says whether we would like to get it reconciled or not on >>>> a restart. >>>> >>>> Any thoughts – Anil/Jozef/Luis? >>>> >>>> -shuva >>>> >>>> From: Anil Vishnoi [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 9:58 AM >>>> To: Luis Gomez >>>> Cc: Shuva Jyoti Kar; [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] Bugzilla components for OpenFlow Plugin? >>>> >>>> Luis, I think openflowplugin reconciliation guarantees that it will >>>> reconcile any flow that is present in the config data store for a specific >>>> switch/node, it does not guarantees that it will try to sync the switch >>>> state with whatever it has in config data store. There is possibility that >>>> user installs few flows manually and don't want controller to interfere >>>> with those flows. Jozef,shuva - correct me if i am wrong. >>>> >>>> I think we should add an option that user can configure if they want to >>>> start with the clean state. In that case controller will delete all the >>>> flows from the switch and install the flows present in the data store, >>>> otherwise it will do the reconciliation which it's currently doing. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 7:27 AM, Luis Gomez <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Actually I pushed the config via REST: >>>> >>>> PUT >>>> http://192.168.0.1:8181/restconf/config/forwarding-rules-manager-config:forwarding-rules-manager-config >>>> { >>>> "forwarding-rules-manager-config": { >>>> "stale-marking-enabled": true, >>>> "reconciliation-retry-count": 5 >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> I see some log in karaf: >>>> >>>> 2016-11-22 17:16:47,632 | INFO | on-dispatcher-40 | >>>> FlowNodeReconciliationImpl | 217 - >>>> org.opendaylight.openflowplugin.applications.forwardingrules-manager - >>>> 0.3.2.SNAPSHOT | Stale-Marking is ENABLED and proceeding with deletion of >>>> stale-marked entities on switch InstanceIdentifier{targetType=interface >>>> org.opendaylight.yang.gen.v1.urn.opendaylight.flow.inventory.rev130819.FlowCapableNode, >>>> >>>> path=[org.opendaylight.yang.gen.v1.urn.opendaylight.inventory.rev130819.Nodes, >>>> >>>> org.opendaylight.yang.gen.v1.urn.opendaylight.inventory.rev130819.nodes.Node[key=NodeKey >>>> [_id=Uri [_value=openflow:18088224186126241907]]], >>>> org.opendaylight.yang.gen.v1.urn.opendaylight.flow.inventory.rev130819.FlowCapableNode]} >>>> >>>> But no flows are being deleted from the switch so I will open a bug >>>> shortly. >>>> >>>> BR/Luis >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 22, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Luis Gomez <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Shuva, I do not think this is enough, if I connect a switch with flows to >>>> controller loaded with odl-openflowplugin-flow-services, the existing >>>> flows do not get deleted. I am looking for the setting that deletes any >>>> existing flow in the switch if controller for example does not have any >>>> flow programmed. >>>> >>>> BR/Luis >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 22, 2016, at 10:05 AM, Shuva Jyoti Kar >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Luis, >>>> >>>> On the older model of the openflowplugin : >>>> >>>> Feature : odl-openflowplugin-flow-services-he // feature:install >>>> odl-openflowplugin-flow-services-he >>>> >>>> On the current model of the openflowplugin : >>>> >>>> Feature: odl-openflowplugin-flow-services // feature:install >>>> odl-openflowplugin-flow-services >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> shuva >>>> >>>> From: Luis Gomez [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 11:01 PM >>>> To: Shuva Jyoti Kar >>>> Cc: Anil Vishnoi; [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] Bugzilla components for OpenFlow Plugin? >>>> >>>> Hi Shuva, I am looking for the feature that automatically adjusts groups >>>> and flows in the switch when this connects to the controller. I sent >>>> separate thread: >>>> >>>> https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/openflowplugin-dev/2016-November/006375.html >>>> >>>> And got some answer from Alexis but it would be good if you can provide an >>>> example on how to enable the feature as I am not that familiar with >>>> blueprint. >>>> >>>> BR/Luis >>>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 21, 2016, at 8:55 PM, Shuva Jyoti Kar >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Apologies for replying to an older email, but there is no “reconciliation” >>>> mode, just a switch/controller/node(controller instance) restart would >>>> trigger it . >>>> What is the exact flag/setting that you are looking for ? Maybe I could >>>> help you with that >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Shuva >>>> >>>> From: [email protected] >>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>>> Luis Gomez >>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 11:33 PM >>>> To: Anil Vishnoi; [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] Bugzilla components for OpenFlow Plugin? >>>> >>>> Talking about reconciliation, I was thinking in pushing some test to >>>> verify this feature, can anyone point me to the instruction to enable >>>> "reconciliation" mode (switch flows = controller flows)? >>>> >>>> On Nov 15, 2016, at 10:29 PM, Anil Vishnoi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> List looks good, probably we want to add reconciliation also in the >>>> component list. I think for features, we have Enhancement / Improvement >>>> that you can select for specific bug. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> We are currently using bugzilla with bugs title starting with "MILESTONE: >>>> " for new features. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Shuva Jyoti Kar >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> +1, sounds really good. >>>> Also I was thinking of a template to track new features In ofplugin. Any >>>> thoughts ? >>>> >>>> -shuva >>>> >>>> From: [email protected] >>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>>> Abhijit Kumbhare >>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 12:35 AM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: [openflowplugin-dev] Bugzilla components for OpenFlow Plugin? >>>> >>>> Hi folks, >>>> >>>> We only have a single component for bugzilla in OpenFlow plugin. In >>>> bugzilla, we used to also have a feature of default assignees for >>>> components. I think it would be a good idea to have more components like >>>> for better searching as well as bug assignment: >>>> >>>> • Stats >>>> • FRM >>>> • FRS >>>> • Clustering >>>> • Connection Manager >>>> • Topology / Inventory >>>> • Helium design stats >>>> • Helium design FRM >>>> • Helium design clustering >>>> • Helium design topology/inventory >>>> What do you folks think? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Abhijit >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> openflowplugin-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks >>>> Anil >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> openflowplugin-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks >>>> Anil >>> >> > _______________________________________________ openflowplugin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
