In most telecom carriers network architecture, they may demand hardware
switches for performance consideration.
The network architecture is as follow:
---------------
| ovn-sb |
---------------
| |
| |
-------------- -----------------
|ovn-controller| |ovn-controller-hw|
--------------- ------------------
| | |
---------------- ------------------
| | | hardware switch |
| | -------------------
| ovs | |
|computer node | |----------------|
| | | sriov |
| | | |
|--------------| | computer node |
------------------
Now, most hardware switches only support vxlan encapsulation. So we think
if ovn could support vxlan
encapsulation will be better. this is the reason that why we do the modify
as the patch.
Now, ovn used for the scenary of hardware-switches link to sriov
network-card is very difficult,
and we want do more works for ovn-controller-hw to support hardware
switch.
Do have some good idea about this scenary?
Thanks
Russell Bryant <[email protected]>
发件人： [email protected]
2017/05/04 10:57
收件人： xurong00037997 <[email protected]>,
抄送： ovs dev <[email protected]>
主题： Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH] ovn-controller: Support vxlan tunnel
in ovn
On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:17 PM, xurong00037997 <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Because vxlan envelope have no enough fields to carry pipeline
information
> between ovs, so current ovn version do not support vxlan tunnel.
> However, may only vxlan tunnel can be used in some special scenario. so
we
> think it is necessary to implement the function of vxlan. For this
> purpose, we do the modifications as follow:
> 1. packets received from vxlan jump to table 29 for outport finding
> 2. add mac-binding information to table 29
> ---
> ovn/controller/lflow.c | 51
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ovn/controller/lflow.h | 1 +
> ovn/controller/physical.c | 9 +++++----
> 3 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> mode change 100644 => 100755 ovn/controller/lflow.c
> mode change 100644 => 100755 ovn/controller/lflow.h
> mode change 100644 => 100755 ovn/controller/physical.c
>
I'm interested in how you concluded that VXLAN support was needed.
I've been looking at this question pretty extensively and have not
been able to find any good justification for why VXLAN support should
be added to OVN.
Can you expand on what special scenarios you have in mind?
Thanks,
--
Russell Bryant
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
