On 2/21/20 6:40 PM, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> OVN currently performs L2 address resolution and IP buffering on the
> gw node. If the system relies on FIPs, OVN will re-inject the buffered
> IP packets on the gw node, while following packets will go though
> the localnet port on the compute node resulting in a ToR switch
> misconfiguration. This patch addresses the issue managing ARP
> and IP buffering locally if FIPs are configured on the node
>
> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi <[email protected]>
Hi Lorenzo,
Overall, the code looks ok to me. Just a few comments/questions inline.
Thanks,
Dumitru
> ---
> northd/ovn-northd.8.xml | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> northd/ovn-northd.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml b/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
> index a27dfa951..23b385377 100644
> --- a/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
> +++ b/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
> @@ -2405,6 +2405,37 @@ output;
> </p>
> </li>
>
> + <li>
> + <p>
> + For distributed logical routers where one of the logical router
> ports
> + specifies a <code>redirect-chassis</code>, a priority-400 logical
> + flow for each <code>dnat_and_snat</code> NAT rules configured.
> + These flows will allow to properly forward traffic to the external
> + connections if available and avoid sending it through the tunnel.
> + Assuming the following NAT rule has been configured:
> + </p>
> +
> + <pre>
> +external_ip = <var>A</var>;
> +external_mac = <var>B</var>;
> +logical_ip = <var>C</var>;
> + </pre>
> +
> + <p>
> + the following action will be applied:
> + </p>
> +
> + <pre>
> +ip.ttl--;
> +reg0 = <var>ip.dst</var>;
> +reg1 = <var>A</var>;
> +eth.src = <var>B</var>;
> +outport = <var>router-port</var>;
> +next;
> + </pre>
> +
> + </li>
> +
> <li>
> <p>
> IPv4 routing table. For each route to IPv4 network <var>N</var>
> with
> diff --git a/northd/ovn-northd.c b/northd/ovn-northd.c
> index 721cb05ce..8cecc98ca 100644
> --- a/northd/ovn-northd.c
> +++ b/northd/ovn-northd.c
> @@ -7338,6 +7338,42 @@ build_ecmp_route_flow(struct hmap *lflows, struct
> ovn_datapath *od,
> ds_destroy(&actions);
> }
>
> +#define DROUTE_PRIO 400
Can we move this where the route related structure definitions are? I
guess it would fit better before the definition of "struct
parsed_route". Also a comment describing why we need it would be useful.
> +static void
> +add_distributed_routes(struct hmap *lflows, struct ovn_datapath *od)
> +{
> + struct ds actions = DS_EMPTY_INITIALIZER;
> + struct ds match = DS_EMPTY_INITIALIZER;
> +
> + if (!od->l3dgw_port || !od->nbr) {
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + for (size_t i = 0; i < od->nbr->n_nat; i++) {
> + const struct nbrec_nat *nat = od->nbr->nat[i];
> +
> + if (strcmp(nat->type, "dnat_and_snat") ||
> + !nat->external_mac || !nat->external_ip) {
Please remove the extra whitespace after "!nat->external_mac".
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + bool is_ipv4 = strchr(nat->logical_ip, '.') ? true : false;
> + ds_put_format(&match, "ip%s.src == %s &&
> is_chassis_resident(\"%s\")",
> + is_ipv4 ? "4" : "6", nat->logical_ip,
> + nat->logical_port);
> + char *prefix = is_ipv4 ? "" : "xx";
> + ds_put_format(&actions, "outport = %s; eth.src = %s; "
> + "%sreg0 = ip%s.dst; %sreg1 = %s; next;",
> + od->l3dgw_port->json_key, nat->external_mac,
> + prefix, is_ipv4 ? "4" : "6",
> + prefix, nat->external_ip);
> + ovn_lflow_add(lflows, od, S_ROUTER_IN_IP_ROUTING, DROUTE_PRIO,
> + ds_cstr(&match), ds_cstr(&actions));
> + ds_clear(&match);
> + ds_clear(&actions);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static void
> add_route(struct hmap *lflows, const struct ovn_port *op,
> const char *lrp_addr_s, const char *network_s, int plen,
> @@ -7359,6 +7395,9 @@ add_route(struct hmap *lflows, const struct ovn_port
> *op,
> }
> build_route_match(op_inport, network_s, plen, is_src_route, is_ipv4,
> &match, &priority);
I'm a bit confused here. Why do we need to bump priority only for some
router ports while in add_distributed_routes we add flows with priority
400 for the whole datapath? Shouldn't the condition here match with the
condition that needs to be true in add_distributed_routes in order to
add the flows for nat rules?
In any case, I think a comment would be nice helpful.
> + if (op->nbrp && !op->nbrp->n_gateway_chassis) {
> + priority += DROUTE_PRIO;
> + }
>
> struct ds actions = DS_EMPTY_INITIALIZER;
> ds_put_format(&actions, "ip.ttl--; "REG_ECMP_GROUP_ID" = 0; %sreg0 = ",
> @@ -8927,7 +8966,7 @@ build_lrouter_flows(struct hmap *datapaths, struct hmap
> *ports,
> nat->logical_ip,
> od->l3dgw_port->json_key);
> ovn_lflow_add_with_hint(lflows, od, S_ROUTER_IN_GW_REDIRECT,
> - 100, ds_cstr(&match), "next;",
> + 200, ds_cstr(&match), "next;",
> &nat->header_);
> }
>
> @@ -9208,6 +9247,13 @@ build_lrouter_flows(struct hmap *datapaths, struct
> hmap *ports,
> ovn_lflow_add(lflows, od, S_ROUTER_IN_ND_RA_RESPONSE, 0, "1",
> "next;");
> }
>
> + /* Logical router ingress table IP_ROUTING - IP routing for distributed
> + * logical router
> + */
> + HMAP_FOR_EACH (od, key_node, datapaths) {
> + add_distributed_routes(lflows, od);
> + }
> +
> /* Logical router ingress table IP_ROUTING & IP_ROUTING_ECMP: IP Routing.
> *
> * A packet that arrives at this table is an IP packet that should be
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
