On 4/7/25 11:40 AM, Aleksandra Rukomoinikova wrote:
> Hello Dumitru,
>
Hi Alexandra,
> sorry to bother you, did i understand right your comment regarding the third
> rules? about the need to take into account hairpin_snat_ip ?
No worries :). Yes, that's one thing, we need to take into account the
hairpin_snat_ip.
I was also asking for a new system-ovn.at test (e2e test) that exercises
those flows. That's partially because I still don't fully understand
how reply traffic is supposed to be handled. But a test might clarify
that for me.
Thanks,
Dumitru
> On 04.04.2025 13:55, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
>
> On 4/3/25 6:57 PM, Aleksandra Rukomoinikova wrote:
>
>
> On 03.04.2025 11:58, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
> /Hi, Dumitru/
> Thank you for your time, I will respond to your comments below.
>
>
>
> Hi Alexandra,
>
>
>
> On 3/23/25 3:07 PM, Vladislav Odintsov wrote:
>
>
> Hi Dumitru, Venu,
>
>
>
> Hi Vladislav,
>
>
>
> thanks for your time spent digging into this!
>
> The code within current patch sends reply traffic to conntrack only if it
> sees that it needs to do that (LB is created within the datapath). If there
> is no LB, so traffic will not be sent to conntrack and HW-offload will
> probably work.
> I’m worried why load balancer is created even if it doesn’t work in such
> scenario? Shouldn’t that be fixed from the orchestrator side (not to create
> LB)?
>
>
>
> I guess I'm a bit confused by the statement above. I don't see all
> reply traffic being sent to conntrack. Instead the patch only sends
> traffic destined to the LB VIP to conntrack.
>
> @@ -7752,8 +7806,7 @@ build_lb_rules_pre_stateful(struct lflow_table *lflows,
> }
> ds_put_cstr(action, "ct_lb_mark;");
>
> - ds_put_format(match, REGBIT_CONNTRACK_NAT" == 1 && %s.dst == %s",
> - ip_match, lb_vip->vip_str);
> + ds_put_format(match, "%s.dst == %s", ip_match, lb_vip->vip_str);
> if (lb_vip->port_str) {
> ds_put_format(match, " && %s.dst == %s", lb->proto,
> lb_vip->port_str);
> @@ -7763,6 +7816,22 @@ build_lb_rules_pre_stateful(struct lflow_table *lflows,
> lflows, lb_dps->nb_ls_map, ods_size(ls_datapaths),
> S_SWITCH_IN_PRE_STATEFUL, 120, ds_cstr(match), ds_cstr(action),
> &lb->nlb->header_, lb_dps->lflow_ref);
> +
> + /* Pass all VIP traffic to the conntrack to support
> + load balancers in the case of stateless acl. */
> + if (lb_vip->port_str && lb->proto) {
> + ds_clear(action);
> + ds_clear(match);
> +
> + ds_put_cstr(action, "ct_lb_mark;");
> + ds_put_format(match, "%s && %s.dst == %s",
> + lb->proto, ip_match, lb_vip->vip_str);
> +
> + ovn_lflow_add_with_dp_group(
> + lflows, lb_dps->nb_ls_map, ods_size(ls_datapaths),
> + S_SWITCH_IN_PRE_STATEFUL, 115, ds_cstr(match),
> ds_cstr(action),
> + &lb->nlb->header_, lb_dps->lflow_ref);
> + }
> }
> }
>
> Also, the code above generates logical flows in in_pre_stateful, at priority
> 115, that can never be matched.
>
> E.g., "make sandbox" and then:
> $ ovn-nbctl ls-add sw1
> $ ovn-nbctl lb-add lb 1.1.1.1:80 2.2.2.2:80 tcp
> $ ovn-nbctl ls-lb-add sw1 lb
> $ ovn-nbctl acl-add sw1 from-lport 1002 'ip4 || ip6' allow-stateless
>
> Dump the in_pre_stateful relevant logical flows:
>
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip4.dst == 1.1.1.1
> && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 1.1.1.1; reg2[0..15] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=115 , match=(reg0[2] == 1 &&
> ip.is_frag), action=(reg0[19] = 1; ct_lb_mark;)
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=115 , match=(tcp && ip4.dst ==
> 1.1.1.1), action=(ct_lb_mark;)
>
> The first flow match (prio 120) is a super set of the match of the third
>
>
>
> I had missed the tcp.dst == 80 match here, it's not a super set. But
> still, please see my comment on LB hairpin below.
>
>
>
> flow match (prio 115). That means the third flow will never be hit.
>
> This seems a bit weird.
>
> Regards,
> Dumitru
>
>
>
> regards,
> Vladislav Odintsov
>
>
>
> On 23 Mar 2025, at 11:56, Dumitru Ceara via dev
> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 3/22/25 2:01 AM, Venu Iyer wrote:
>
>
> Sorry for the much delayed response Dumitru; I am just catching up on this
> and will look at the patch and follow-ups.
> Just a quick response below.
>
>
>
> Hi Venu,
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Dumitru Ceara <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2025 6:00 AM
> To: Aleksandra Rukomoinikova
> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>;
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> Cc: Venu Iyer <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>; Han Zhou
> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>; Numan Siddique
> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH ovn v2] northd: Make work load balancer with stateless
> ACL.
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
>
>
> On 3/18/25 5:08 PM, Aleksandra Rukomoinikova wrote:
> Hi Dumitru,
>
>
>
> Hi Alexandra,
>
>
>
> I want to clarify a little my question that I asked yesterday at the meeting,
> it was formulated incorrectly by me
>
> in a situation when we have stateless acl and related one (or lb configured)
>
> before patch [0] (that is, before version v23.03.0 judging by the log) there
> was a lookup in ingress
> and in the egress of all packages in the conntrack
>
> because the packages fell under:
>
> table=4 (ls_in_pre_acl), priority=100, match=(ip), action=(reg0[0] = 1; next;)
> table=0 (ls_out_pre_lb), priority=100, match=(ip), action=(reg0[2] = 1; next;)
>
> and then the packages were not committed because:
> table=8 (ls_in_acl), priority=2002, match=(stateless acl match),
> action=(next;)
>
> That is, we were cheating traffic to the contract, but did not commit, an
> invalid state was returned.
>
> That is, such a situation arose when using stateless acls, which are higher
> priority than statefull ones
> or also when using lb.
>
> A similar situation is now occurring in my patch, I bypass it this way:
>
> Despite the enabled ct_match_inv option, we add it only if there is no
> stateless acl + lb bundle
>
> What do you think?
>
> [0] -
> https://github.com/ovn-org/ovn/commit/a0f82efdd9dfd3ef2d9606c1890e353df1097a51.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the additional details!
>
> I'm CC-ing Venu, Han and Numan for more input on this. Venu, you added
> this restriction that doesn't allow traffic matched by stateless ACLs to
> be load balanced, what is your opinion with respect to Alexandra's
> suggested change below?
>
>
>
> [0] Removed support for using load balancers in conjunction with stateless
> ACL.
> This commit removes the ability to use load balancers alongside stateless ACL.
> If a load balancer is created, the datapath is no longer fully stateless.
> Therefore, to avoid traffic being directed to the contract, it is recommended
> to refrain from creating a load balancer entirely.
>
>
>
> This was an issue with ovn-k8s where the logical switch has LB for the
> service IPs ..
> and this made configuring any stateless rules impossible - e.g if there is a
> application
> with unidirection UDP flows such flows will not be offloaded without
> stateless.
>
>
>
>
>
> Commit [0] ensures the separation of stateful and stateless scenarios
> in the absence of load balancers, without altering the functionality
> of load balancers themselves.
>
> When a logical switch is configured with stateless ACL and a load balancer,
> the check for the `REGBIT_CONNTRACK_NAT` flag in the `pre_lb` stage of
> the ingress pipeline becomes redundant. Traffic directed to the load balancer
> must be processed through the conntrack.
>
> To ensure proper load balancer operation, a rule must be added to match
> the load balancer's VIP address and its protocol (if applicable). This rule
> is added to the datapath group and does not negatively impact performance.
> Packets matching this rule would still be directed to the contract via
> lower-priority rules in the absence of stateless ACL. However, with stateless
> ACL,
> this rule enables load balancing when the client balances traffic to itself.
>
> In the egress pipeline, the stateless register should only be set if no
> load balancers are present on the datapath. This maintains a clear separation
> between Stateful and Stateless modes when using ACL.
> If a user creates a load balancer on a logical switch, they should be aware
> that the traffic will no longer be fully stateless.
>
>
> I think statelesss and LB should not overlap and, hence, should be able to
> coexist. Maybe Han can provide some input as well.
>
>
>
> Ah, I see, so the problem was for unidirectional traffic that needs to
> be offloaded (which doesn't happen if it's forwarded on
> ct_state=+trk+new).
>
> I guess Alexandra's change here doesn't suffice though:
>
> @@ -7763,6 +7816,22 @@ build_lb_rules_pre_stateful(struct lflow_table
> *lflows,
> lflows, lb_dps->nb_ls_map, ods_size(ls_datapaths),
> S_SWITCH_IN_PRE_STATEFUL, 120, ds_cstr(match), ds_cstr(action),
> &lb->nlb->header_, lb_dps->lflow_ref);
> +
> + /* Pass all VIP traffic to the conntrack to support
> + load balancers in the case of stateless acl. */
> + if (lb_vip->port_str && lb->proto) {
> + ds_clear(action);
> + ds_clear(match);
> +
> + ds_put_cstr(action, "ct_lb_mark;");
> + ds_put_format(match, "%s && %s.dst == %s",
> + lb->proto, ip_match, lb_vip->vip_str);
> +
> + ovn_lflow_add_with_dp_group(
> + lflows, lb_dps->nb_ls_map, ods_size(ls_datapaths),
> + S_SWITCH_IN_PRE_STATEFUL, 115, ds_cstr(match),
> ds_cstr(action),
> + &lb->nlb->header_, lb_dps->lflow_ref);
> + }
> }
>
> This will send to conntrack in the original direction only traffic that is
> destined to the LB VIP.
>
> But for replies we'll send everything to conntrack:
>
> @@ -5894,7 +5894,11 @@ build_stateless_filter(const struct ovn_datapath *od,
>
>
>
> you said that you don't see how all the replay traffic ends up in the
> conntrack:
>
> this flow will be added to the egress pipeline only if there are no lb,
> and it is responsible for sending packets to the conntrack.
>
>
>
>
> I still don't understand, sorry. Let's assume we have a TCP LB with
> VIP=42.42.42.42:80 and backends=10.10.10.3:8080 configured on a switch;
> and a client LSP (10.10.10.2) and a server LSP (10.10.10.3).
>
> The client tries to connect to the LB VIP:
>
> 1. TCP SYN:
> ip_src=10.10.10.2, tcp_src=x, ip_dst=42.42.42.42, tcp_dst=80
>
> 2. TCP SYN is DNATed by the OVN LB:
> ip_src=10.10.10.2, tcp_src=x, ip_dst=10.10.10.3, tcp_dst=8080
>
> 3. The SYN reaches the server and the server replies with SYN+ACK:
> ip_src=10.10.10.3, tcp_src=8080, ip_dst=10.10.10.2, tcp_dst=x
>
> This packet should be unDNATed. How is this packet matched by the flow
> you mentioned above? That flow matches on ip.dst == lb.vip.
>
>
>
> action,
> &acl->header_,
> lflow_ref);
> - } else {
> + } else if (!od->nbs->n_load_balancer){
> + /* For cases when we have statefull ACLs but no load
> + balancer configured on logical switch - we should
> + completely bypass conntrack on egress, otherwise
> + it is necessary to check the balanced traffic. */
> ovn_lflow_add_with_hint(lflows, od, S_SWITCH_OUT_PRE_ACL,
> acl->priority + OVN_ACL_PRI_OFFSET,
> acl->match,
>
> So, I'm afraid we are also going to need something that restricts traffic
> that is sent to conntrack in the reply direction. E.g., logical flows
> that match on traffic originated by load balancer backends.
>
> We need to be careful when we do that though. We don't want to create
> a logical flow explosion (there can be quite a few backends so a logical
> flow per backend might be very costly for both ovn-northd and the SB DB).
>
>
>
> regarding the added flows in ingress:
>
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip4.dst == 1.1.1.1
> && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 1.1.1.1; reg2[0..15] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=115 , match=(reg0[2] == 1 &&
> ip.is_frag), action=(reg0[19] = 1; ct_lb_mark;)
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=115 , match=(tcp && ip4.dst ==
> 1.1.1.1), action=(ct_lb_mark;)
>
> priorities overlapped, i think, i should fix it like this ?
>
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=125 , match=(ip4.dst == 1.1.1.1
> && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 1.1.1.1; reg2[0..15] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[2] == 1 &&
> ip.is_frag), action=(reg0[19] = 1; ct_lb_mark;)
> table=6 (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=115 , match=(tcp && ip4.dst ==
> 1.1.1.1), action=(ct_lb_mark;)
>
> the first rule will work for lb in general, the third rule is important
> in balancing from the client to itself to establish a connection before
> dnat occurs.
>
>
>
> I'm not sure I follow. For hairpin traffic, client -> LB -> client,
> there's an additional SNAT happening after DNAT in the original
> direction. The SNAT IP is not necessarily the LB VIP, it's configurable
> through LB.options.hairpin_snat_ip. And we already support this kind of
> connection so I'm not sure why we need that third flow. We already have
> LB hairpin system tests for the regular case. Would it be possible to
> add new ones for the case when we have (stateless) ACLs too?
>
>
>
> Sorry again for not being on top of this.
>
>
>
> No worries, thanks for the reply!
>
> Regards,
> Dumitru
>
>
>
> -venu
>
>
>
> Also in case of lb configured with stateless ACLs we no longer take into
> account
> ct.inv packets in egress. They will be dropped further, at the hypervisor
> level.
>
> [0] - ovn-org@a0f82ef.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandra Rukomoinikova
> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> ---
> northd/northd.c | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> northd/ovn-northd.8.xml | 13 ++++-
> tests/ovn-northd.at | 106 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> tests/ovn.at | 8 +--
> tests/system-ovn.at | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++---
> 5 files changed, 238 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>
>
> The "237: system-ovn-kmod.at:1031 Load Balancer LS hairpin IPv4 UDP -
> larger than MTU" test is failing with this patch applied, see CI run here:
> https://github.com/ovsrobot/ovn/actions/runs/13928303850/job/38978852134#step:9:4712
>
> Something is weird because the test in question doesn't use stateless
> ACLs at all. So there must be a bug that's introduced by your patch.
>
> I did a cursory review of the rest of the patch and shared some more
> comments below.
>
> However, I'd like to hear from Venu/Han/Numan first, if possible, before
> moving towards a v3.
>
>
>
> diff --git a/northd/northd.c b/northd/northd.c
> index 1d3e132d4..fab420784 100644
> --- a/northd/northd.c
> +++ b/northd/northd.c
> @@ -5894,7 +5894,11 @@ build_stateless_filter(const struct ovn_datapath *od,
> action,
> &acl->header_,
> lflow_ref);
> - } else {
> + } else if (!od->nbs->n_load_balancer){
> + /* For cases when we have statefull ACLs but no load
> + balancer configured on logical switch - we should
> + completely bypass conntrack on egress, otherwise
> + it is necessary to check the balanced traffic. */
> ovn_lflow_add_with_hint(lflows, od, S_SWITCH_OUT_PRE_ACL,
> acl->priority + OVN_ACL_PRI_OFFSET,
> acl->match,
> @@ -7355,6 +7359,49 @@ choose_max_acl_tier(const struct ls_stateful_record
> *ls_stateful_rec,
> }
> }
>
> +/* In the case of stateless ACLs and load balancers, all traffic
> + * is passed to conntrack during egress pipeline. Conntrack will
> + * mark the packets as 'invalid,' but since stateless systems do
> + * not rely on conntrack state, these invalid packets will be
> + * discarded during processing on the hypervisor level.
> + */
> +static bool
> +stateless_inv_match(const struct ls_stateful_record *ls_stateful_rec,
> + const struct ovn_datapath *od,
> + const struct ls_port_group_table *ls_port_groups)
> +{
> + bool inv_match = true;
>
>
> There's no need for this variable, we always return after setting its value.
>
>
>
> +
> + if (ls_stateful_rec->has_lb_vip) {
> + for (size_t i = 0; i < od->nbs->n_acls; i++) {
> + const struct nbrec_acl *acl = od->nbs->acls[i];
> + if (!strcmp(acl->action, "allow-stateless")) {
> + inv_match = false;
> + return inv_match;
>
>
> Just return false here.
>
> However, a cleaner and slightly more efficient way of doing this would
> be to add a "has_stateless_acl" field to "struct ls_stateful_record" and
> populate it in ls_stateful_record_set_acl_flags().
>
>
>
> + }
> + }
> +
> + const struct ls_port_group *ls_pg =
> + ls_port_group_table_find(ls_port_groups, od->nbs);
> + if (!ls_pg) {
> + return inv_match;
> + }
> +
> + const struct ls_port_group_record *ls_pg_rec;
> + HMAP_FOR_EACH (ls_pg_rec, key_node, &ls_pg->nb_pgs) {
> + for (size_t i = 0; i < ls_pg_rec->nb_pg->n_acls; i++) {
> + const struct nbrec_acl *acl = ls_pg_rec->nb_pg->acls[i];
> + if (!strcmp(acl->action, "allow-stateless")) {
> + inv_match = false;
> + return inv_match;
> + }
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return inv_match;
> +}
> +
> static void
> build_acls(const struct ls_stateful_record *ls_stateful_rec,
> const struct ovn_datapath *od,
> @@ -7457,8 +7504,15 @@ build_acls(const struct ls_stateful_record
> *ls_stateful_rec,
> *
> * This is enforced at a higher priority than ACLs can be defined. */
> ds_clear(&match);
> - ds_put_format(&match, "%s(ct.est && ct.rpl && ct_mark.blocked == 1)",
> - use_ct_inv_match ? "ct.inv || " : "");
> +
> + if (use_ct_inv_match && stateless_inv_match(ls_stateful_rec,
> + od, ls_port_groups)) {
> + ds_put_cstr(&match, "ct.inv || (ct.est && ct.rpl && "
> + "ct_mark.blocked == 1)");
> + } else {
> + ds_put_cstr(&match, "ct.est && ct.rpl && ct_mark.blocked == 1");
> + }
>
>
> If we go this way we should probably also update the "use_ct_inv_match"
> documentation in ovn-nb.xml.
>
> This is also a very noticeable behavior change, we should at least
> mention it in NEWS if we accept this patch.
>
>
>
> +
> ovn_lflow_add(lflows, od, S_SWITCH_IN_ACL_EVAL, UINT16_MAX - 3,
> ds_cstr(&match), REGBIT_ACL_VERDICT_DROP " = 1; next;",
> lflow_ref);
> @@ -7752,8 +7806,7 @@ build_lb_rules_pre_stateful(struct lflow_table *lflows,
> }
> ds_put_cstr(action, "ct_lb_mark;");
>
> - ds_put_format(match, REGBIT_CONNTRACK_NAT" == 1 && %s.dst == %s",
> - ip_match, lb_vip->vip_str);
> + ds_put_format(match, "%s.dst == %s", ip_match, lb_vip->vip_str);
> if (lb_vip->port_str) {
> ds_put_format(match, " && %s.dst == %s", lb->proto,
> lb_vip->port_str);
> @@ -7763,6 +7816,22 @@ build_lb_rules_pre_stateful(struct lflow_table *lflows,
> lflows, lb_dps->nb_ls_map, ods_size(ls_datapaths),
> S_SWITCH_IN_PRE_STATEFUL, 120, ds_cstr(match), ds_cstr(action),
> &lb->nlb->header_, lb_dps->lflow_ref);
> +
> + /* Pass all VIP traffic to the conntrack to support
> + load balancers in the case of stateless acl. */
> + if (lb_vip->port_str && lb->proto) {
>
>
> lb->proto is always non-NULL, it can be omitted from the condition.
>
> What about load balancers that have a port specified?
>
>
>
> + ds_clear(action);
> + ds_clear(match);
> +
> + ds_put_cstr(action, "ct_lb_mark;");
> + ds_put_format(match, "%s && %s.dst == %s",
> + lb->proto, ip_match, lb_vip->vip_str);
>
>
> Why not restrict this flow to only match traffic destined to the LB
> port, if the LB has a port configured?
>
>
>
> +
> + ovn_lflow_add_with_dp_group(
> + lflows, lb_dps->nb_ls_map, ods_size(ls_datapaths),
> + S_SWITCH_IN_PRE_STATEFUL, 115, ds_cstr(match),
> ds_cstr(action),
> + &lb->nlb->header_, lb_dps->lflow_ref);
> + }
> }
> }
>
> diff --git a/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml b/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
> index 155ba8a49..2719ac77b 100644
> --- a/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
> +++ b/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
> @@ -507,7 +507,7 @@
> <ref table="Logical_Switch_Port" db="OVN_Northbound"/>. Multicast,
> IPv6
> Neighbor Discovery and MLD traffic also skips stateful ACLs. For
> "allow-stateless" ACLs, a flow is added to bypass setting the hint for
> - connection tracker processing when there are stateful ACLs or LB rules;
> + connection tracker processing when there are stateful ACLs without LB;
> <code>REGBIT_ACL_STATELESS</code> is set for traffic matching stateless
> ACL flows.
> </p>
> @@ -624,6 +624,14 @@
> <code>ct_lb_mark;</code> action.
> </li>
>
> + <li>
> + A priority-115 flow sends all packet directed to VIP to connection
> + tracker. Packets that match this rule would still be subject to
> + connection tracking via lower-priority rules in the absence of
> + stateless ACLs. However, with stateless ACLs in place, this rule
> + enables load balancing when the client balances traffic to itself.
> + </li>
> +
> <li>
> A priority-100 flow sends the packets to connection tracker based
> on a hint provided by the previous tables
> @@ -770,7 +778,8 @@
> </li>
> <li>
> <code>allow-stateless</code> ACLs translate into logical flows that
> set
> - the allow bit and advance to the next table.
> + the allow bit and advance to the next table. In case of load
> balancers
> + with stateless ACLs in this table we allow ct.inv packets go further.
> </li>
> <li>
> <code>reject</code> ACLs translate into logical flows with that set
> the
> diff --git a/tests/ovn-northd.at b/tests/ovn-northd.at
> index 419130aa8..c6540f90d 100644
> --- a/tests/ovn-northd.at
> +++ b/tests/ovn-northd.at
> @@ -3747,10 +3747,18 @@ for direction in from to; do
> done
> check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb sync
>
> -# TCP packets should not go to conntrack for load balancing.
> +# TCP packets should go to conntrack for load balancing.
> flow="inport == \"lsp1\" && ${flow_eth} && ${flow_ip} && ${flow_tcp}"
> AT_CHECK_UNQUOTED([ovn_trace --ct new --ct new --minimal ls "${flow}"], [0],
> [dnl
> -output("lsp2");
> +ct_lb_mark {
> + ct_lb_mark {
> + reg0[[6]] = 0;
> + reg0[[12]] = 0;
> + ct_lb_mark /* default (use --ct to customize) */ {
> + output("lsp2");
> + };
> + };
> +};
> ])
>
> # UDP packets still go to conntrack.
> @@ -3883,10 +3891,18 @@ for direction in from to; do
> done
> check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb sync
>
> -# TCP packets should not go to conntrack for load balancing.
> +# TCP packets should go to conntrack for load balancing.
> flow="inport == \"lsp1\" && ${flow_eth} && ${flow_ip} && ${flow_tcp}"
> AT_CHECK_UNQUOTED([ovn_trace --ct new --ct new --minimal ls "${flow}"], [0],
> [dnl
> -output("lsp2");
> +ct_lb_mark {
> + ct_lb_mark {
> + reg0[[6]] = 0;
> + reg0[[12]] = 0;
> + ct_lb_mark /* default (use --ct to customize) */ {
> + output("lsp2");
> + };
> + };
> +};
> ])
>
> # UDP packets still go to conntrack.
> @@ -4770,8 +4786,10 @@ check_stateful_flows() {
> table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=100 , match=(reg0[[0]] == 1),
> action=(ct_next;)
> table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=110 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1),
> action=(ct_lb_mark;)
> table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=115 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 &&
> ip.is_frag), action=(reg0[[19]] = 1; ct_lb_mark;)
> - table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 &&
> ip4.dst == 10.0.0.10 && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.10;
> reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> - table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 &&
> ip4.dst == 10.0.0.20 && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.20;
> reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=115 , match=(tcp && ip4.dst ==
> 10.0.0.10), action=(ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=115 , match=(tcp && ip4.dst ==
> 10.0.0.20), action=(ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip4.dst == 10.0.0.10
> && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.10; reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip4.dst == 10.0.0.20
> && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.20; reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> ])
>
> AT_CHECK([grep "ls_in_lb " sw0flows | ovn_strip_lflows], [0], [dnl
> @@ -5065,16 +5083,16 @@ AT_CAPTURE_FILE([sw0flows])
>
> AT_CHECK([grep -w "ls_in_acl_eval" sw0flows | grep 6553 | ovn_strip_lflows],
> [0], [dnl
> table=??(ls_in_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(!ct.est && ct.rel &&
> !ct.new && ct_mark.blocked == 0), action=(reg0[[17]] = 1; reg8[[16]] = 1;
> ct_commit_nat;)
> - table=??(ls_in_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=((ct.est && ct.rpl &&
> ct_mark.blocked == 1)), action=(reg8[[17]] = 1; next;)
> table=??(ls_in_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est && !ct.rel &&
> !ct.new && ct.rpl && ct_mark.blocked == 0), action=(reg0[[9]] = 0; reg0[[10]]
> = 0; reg0[[17]] = 1; reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_in_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est && ct.rpl &&
> ct_mark.blocked == 1), action=(reg8[[17]] = 1; next;)
> table=??(ls_in_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est &&
> ct_mark.allow_established == 1), action=(reg0[[21]] = 1; reg8[[16]] = 1;
> next;)
> table=??(ls_in_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(nd || nd_ra || nd_rs
> || mldv1 || mldv2), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> ])
>
> AT_CHECK([grep -w "ls_out_acl_eval" sw0flows | grep 6553 | ovn_strip_lflows],
> [0], [dnl
> table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(!ct.est && ct.rel &&
> !ct.new && ct_mark.blocked == 0), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; ct_commit_nat;)
> - table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=((ct.est && ct.rpl &&
> ct_mark.blocked == 1)), action=(reg8[[17]] = 1; next;)
> table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est && !ct.rel &&
> !ct.new && ct.rpl && ct_mark.blocked == 0), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est && ct.rpl &&
> ct_mark.blocked == 1), action=(reg8[[17]] = 1; next;)
> table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est &&
> ct_mark.allow_established == 1), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(nd || nd_ra || nd_rs
> || mldv1 || mldv2), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> ])
> @@ -14333,7 +14351,7 @@ ovn-sbctl dump-flows s1 > s1flows
> AT_CAPTURE_FILE([s1flows])
>
> AT_CHECK([grep "ls_in_pre_stateful" s1flows | ovn_strip_lflows | grep
> "30.0.0.1"], [0], [dnl
> - table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 &&
> ip4.dst == 30.0.0.1), action=(reg4 = 30.0.0.1; ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip4.dst ==
> 30.0.0.1), action=(reg4 = 30.0.0.1; ct_lb_mark;)
> ])
> AT_CHECK([grep "ls_in_lb" s1flows | ovn_strip_lflows | grep "30.0.0.1"], [0],
> [dnl
> table=??(ls_in_lb ), priority=110 , match=(ct.new && ip4.dst ==
> 30.0.0.1), action=(reg4 = 30.0.0.1;
> ct_lb_mark(backends=172.16.0.103,172.16.0.102,172.16.0.101);)
> @@ -14447,7 +14465,7 @@ ovn-sbctl dump-flows s1 > s1flows
> AT_CAPTURE_FILE([s1flows])
>
> AT_CHECK([grep "ls_in_pre_stateful" s1flows | ovn_strip_lflows | grep
> "2001:db8:cccc::1"], [0], [dnl
> - table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 &&
> ip6.dst == 2001:db8:cccc::1), action=(xxreg1 = 2001:db8:cccc::1; ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip6.dst ==
> 2001:db8:cccc::1), action=(xxreg1 = 2001:db8:cccc::1; ct_lb_mark;)
> ])
> AT_CHECK([grep "ls_in_lb" s1flows | ovn_strip_lflows | grep
> "2001:db8:cccc::1"], [0], [dnl
> table=??(ls_in_lb ), priority=110 , match=(ct.new && ip6.dst ==
> 2001:db8:cccc::1), action=(xxreg1 = 2001:db8:cccc::1;
> ct_lb_mark(backends=2001:db8:aaaa:3::103,2001:db8:aaaa:3::102,2001:db8:aaaa:3::101);)
> @@ -14558,7 +14576,7 @@ ovn-sbctl dump-flows s1 > s1flows
> AT_CAPTURE_FILE([s1flows])
>
> AT_CHECK([grep "ls_in_pre_stateful" s1flows | ovn_strip_lflows | grep
> "30.0.0.1"], [0], [dnl
> - table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 &&
> ip4.dst == 30.0.0.1), action=(reg4 = 30.0.0.1; ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip4.dst ==
> 30.0.0.1), action=(reg4 = 30.0.0.1; ct_lb_mark;)
> ])
> AT_CHECK([grep "ls_in_lb" s1flows | ovn_strip_lflows | grep "30.0.0.1"], [0],
> [dnl
> table=??(ls_in_lb ), priority=110 , match=(ct.new && ip4.dst ==
> 30.0.0.1), action=(reg4 = 30.0.0.1;
> ct_lb_mark(backends=172.16.0.103,172.16.0.102,172.16.0.101);)
> @@ -16753,3 +16771,69 @@ check grep -q "Bad configuration: The peer of the
> switch port 'ls-lrp1' (LRP pee
>
> AT_CLEANUP
> ])
> +
> +OVN_FOR_EACH_NORTHD_NO_HV([
> +AT_SETUP([Load Balancers with stateless ACLs])
> +ovn_start ovn-northd
> +
> +AS_BOX([create logical switches and ports])
> +check ovn-nbctl ls-add sw0
> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb lsp-add sw0 sw0-p1 -- lsp-set-addresses sw0-p1 \
> +"00:00:00:00:00:02 10.0.0.2"
> +
> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb lsp-add sw0 sw0-p2 -- lsp-set-addresses sw0-p2 \
> +"00:00:00:00:00:03 10.0.0.3"
> +
> +AS_BOX([create stateless ACLs])
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-add sw0 from-lport 1001 "ip" allow-stateless
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-add sw0 to-lport 1001 "ip" allow-stateless
> +
> +AS_BOX([create statefull ACLs])
> +# check if allow-stateless acls have higher priority we skip conntrack.
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-add sw0 from-lport 1000 "ip" allow-related
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-add sw0 to-lport 1000 "ip" allow-related
> +
> +ovn-sbctl dump-flows sw0 > sw0flows
> +
> +AT_CHECK(
> + [grep -E 'ls_(in|out)_pre_acl' sw0flows | grep reg0 | ovn_strip_lflows],
> [0], [dnl
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_acl ), priority=100 , match=(ip),
> action=(reg0[[0]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_acl ), priority=2001 , match=(ip),
> action=(reg0[[16]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_pre_acl ), priority=100 , match=(ip),
> action=(reg0[[0]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_pre_acl ), priority=2001 , match=(ip),
> action=(reg0[[16]] = 1; next;)
> +])
> +
> +AT_CHECK(
> + [grep -E 'ls_out_acl_eval' sw0flows | grep 65532 | ovn_strip_lflows], [0],
> [dnl
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(!ct.est && ct.rel &&
> !ct.new && !ct.inv && ct_mark.blocked == 0), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1;
> ct_commit_nat;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est && !ct.rel &&
> !ct.new && !ct.inv && ct.rpl && ct_mark.blocked == 0), action=(reg8[[16]] =
> 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est &&
> ct_mark.allow_established == 1), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.inv || (ct.est &&
> ct.rpl && ct_mark.blocked == 1)), action=(reg8[[17]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(nd || nd_ra || nd_rs
> || mldv1 || mldv2), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> +])
> +
> +AS_BOX([create Load Balancer])
> +check ovn-nbctl lb-add lb1 10.0.0.4:80 10.0.0.2:80,10.0.0.3:80
> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb ls-lb-add sw0 lb1
> +
> +ovn-sbctl dump-flows sw0 > sw0flows
> +
> +AT_CHECK(
> + [grep -E 'ls_(in|out)_pre_acl' sw0flows | grep reg0 | ovn_strip_lflows],
> [0], [dnl
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_acl ), priority=100 , match=(ip),
> action=(reg0[[0]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_acl ), priority=2001 , match=(ip),
> action=(reg0[[16]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_pre_acl ), priority=100 , match=(ip),
> action=(reg0[[0]] = 1; next;)
> +])
> +
> +# we do not match conntrack invalide packets in case of load balancers with
> stateless ACLs
> +AT_CHECK(
> + [grep -E 'ls_out_acl_eval' sw0flows | grep 65532 | ovn_strip_lflows], [0],
> [dnl
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(!ct.est && ct.rel &&
> !ct.new && !ct.inv && ct_mark.blocked == 0), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1;
> ct_commit_nat;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est && !ct.rel &&
> !ct.new && !ct.inv && ct.rpl && ct_mark.blocked == 0), action=(reg8[[16]] =
> 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est && ct.rpl &&
> ct_mark.blocked == 1), action=(reg8[[17]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(ct.est &&
> ct_mark.allow_established == 1), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> + table=??(ls_out_acl_eval ), priority=65532, match=(nd || nd_ra || nd_rs
> || mldv1 || mldv2), action=(reg8[[16]] = 1; next;)
> +])
> +AT_CLEANUP
> +])
> +
> diff --git a/tests/ovn.at b/tests/ovn.at
> index afde2576f..3e299711b 100644
> --- a/tests/ovn.at
> +++ b/tests/ovn.at
> @@ -26345,7 +26345,7 @@ OVS_WAIT_FOR_OUTPUT(
> [ovn-sbctl dump-flows > sbflows
> ovn-sbctl dump-flows sw0 | grep ct_lb_mark | grep priority=120 | sed
> 's/table=..//'], 0,
> [dnl
> - (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 && ip4.dst ==
> 10.0.0.10 && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.10; reg2[[0..15]] = 80;
> ct_lb_mark;)
> + (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip4.dst == 10.0.0.10 &&
> tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.10; reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> (ls_in_lb ), priority=120 , match=(ct.new && ip4.dst ==
> 10.0.0.10 && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.10; reg2[[0..15]] = 80;
> ct_lb_mark(backends=10.0.0.3:80,20.0.0.3:80;
> hash_fields="ip_dst,ip_src,tcp_dst,tcp_src");)
> ])
>
> @@ -26390,7 +26390,7 @@ AT_CHECK(
> [grep "ip4.dst == 10.0.0.10 && tcp.dst == 80" sbflows3 | grep priority=120
> |\
> ovn_strip_lflows], [0], [dnl
> table=??(ls_in_lb ), priority=120 , match=(ct.new && ip4.dst ==
> 10.0.0.10 && tcp.dst == 80), action=(drop;)
> - table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 &&
> ip4.dst == 10.0.0.10 && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.10;
> reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip4.dst == 10.0.0.10
> && tcp.dst == 80), action=(reg4 = 10.0.0.10; reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> ])
>
> AT_CAPTURE_FILE([sbflows4])
> @@ -26551,7 +26551,7 @@ OVS_WAIT_FOR_OUTPUT(
> [ovn-sbctl dump-flows > sbflows
> ovn-sbctl dump-flows sw0 | grep ct_lb_mark | grep priority=120 | sed
> 's/table=..//'], 0,
> [dnl
> - (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 && ip6.dst ==
> 2002::a && tcp.dst == 80), action=(xxreg1 = 2002::a; reg2[[0..15]] = 80;
> ct_lb_mark;)
> + (ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip6.dst == 2002::a &&
> tcp.dst == 80), action=(xxreg1 = 2002::a; reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> (ls_in_lb ), priority=120 , match=(ct.new && ip6.dst == 2002::a
> && tcp.dst == 80), action=(xxreg1 = 2002::a; reg2[[0..15]] = 80;
> ct_lb_mark(backends=[[2001::3]]:80,[[2002::3]]:80;
> hash_fields="ipv6_dst,ipv6_src,tcp_dst,tcp_src");)
> ])
>
> @@ -26595,7 +26595,7 @@ AT_CHECK(
> [grep "ip6.dst == 2002::a && tcp.dst == 80" sbflows3 | grep priority=120 |\
> ovn_strip_lflows], [0], [dnl
> table=??(ls_in_lb ), priority=120 , match=(ct.new && ip6.dst ==
> 2002::a && tcp.dst == 80), action=(drop;)
> - table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(reg0[[2]] == 1 &&
> ip6.dst == 2002::a && tcp.dst == 80), action=(xxreg1 = 2002::a; reg2[[0..15]]
> = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> + table=??(ls_in_pre_stateful ), priority=120 , match=(ip6.dst == 2002::a
> && tcp.dst == 80), action=(xxreg1 = 2002::a; reg2[[0..15]] = 80; ct_lb_mark;)
> ])
>
> AT_CAPTURE_FILE([sbflows4])
> diff --git a/tests/system-ovn.at b/tests/system-ovn.at
> index dd13575e4..658e3eb26 100644
> --- a/tests/system-ovn.at
> +++ b/tests/system-ovn.at
> @@ -10087,6 +10087,28 @@ sed -e 's/zone=[[0-9]]*/zone=<cleared>/'], [0], [dnl
>
> AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/flush-conntrack])
>
> +# del acls
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-del foo
> +
> +# add statefull acl
>
>
> Comments should be sentences: start with a capital letter and end with a
> period. This applies to most comments added by this patch.
>
> Also, I might be wrong but I think the correct version is "stateful"
> instead of "statefull". This remark also applies to multiple places in
> this patch.
>
>
>
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-add foo from-lport 1 1 allow-related
> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=hv acl-add foo to-lport 1 1 allow-related
> +
> +# add stateless acl
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-add foo from-lport 2 1 allow-stateless
> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=hv acl-add foo to-lport 2 1 allow-stateless
> +
> +AT_CHECK([ip netns exec foo1 wget 192.168.2.2 -t 1 -T 1], [0], [ignore],
> [ignore])
> +
> +# check conntrack zone has no entry
> +AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/dump-conntrack zone=$zone_id | \
> +FORMAT_CT(192.168.2.2) | \
> +sed -e 's/zone=[[0-9]]*/zone=<cleared>/'], [0], [dnl
> +])
> +
> +AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/flush-conntrack])
> +
> +# when lb configued: pass conntrack for vip traffic.
>
>
> Typo: configued
>
>
>
> # add lb back
> check ovn-nbctl ls-lb-add foo lb1
>
> @@ -10096,13 +10118,14 @@ check ovn-nbctl --wait=hv sync
> OVS_WAIT_UNTIL([ovs-ofctl -O OpenFlow13 dump-groups br-int | \
> grep 'nat(dst=192.168.2.2:80)'])
>
> -# should not dnat so will not be able to connect
> -AT_CHECK([ip netns exec foo1 curl 30.30.30.30 --retry 3 --max-time 1], [28],
> [ignore], [ignore])
> +# now check with VIP
> +AT_CHECK([ip netns exec foo1 wget 30.30.30.30 -t 3 -T 1], [0], [ignore],
> [ignore])
>
> -# check conntrack zone has no tcp entry
> +# check conntrack zone has tcp entry
> AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/dump-conntrack zone=$zone_id | \
> FORMAT_CT(30.30.30.30) | \
> sed -e 's/zone=[[0-9]]*/zone=<cleared>/'], [0], [dnl
> +tcp,orig=(src=192.168.1.2,dst=30.30.30.30,sport=<cleared>,dport=<cleared>),reply=(src=192.168.2.2,dst=192.168.1.2,sport=<cleared>,dport=<cleared>),zone=<cleared>,mark=2,protoinfo=(state=<cleared>)
> ])
>
> AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/flush-conntrack])
> @@ -10217,6 +10240,29 @@ AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/flush-conntrack])
> # remove lb
> check ovn-nbctl ls-lb-del foo lb1
>
> +# del acls
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-del foo
> +
> +# add statefull acl
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-add foo from-lport 1 1 allow-related
> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=hv acl-add foo to-lport 1 1 allow-related
> +
> +# add stateless acl
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-add foo from-lport 2 1 allow-stateless
> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=hv acl-add foo to-lport 2 1 allow-stateless
> +
> +AT_CHECK([ip netns exec foo1 wget http://[[fd12::2]] -t 1 -T 1], [0],
> [ignore], [ignore])
> +
> +# check conntrack zone has no tcp entry
> +AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/dump-conntrack zone=$zone_id | \
> +FORMAT_CT(fd12::2) | grep -v fe80 | \
> +sed -e 's/zone=[[0-9]]*/zone=<cleared>/'], [0], [dnl
> +])
> +
> +AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/flush-conntrack])
> +
> +check ovn-nbctl acl-del foo
> +
> # add stateless acl
> check ovn-nbctl acl-add foo from-lport 1 1 allow-stateless
> check ovn-nbctl --wait=hv acl-add foo to-lport 1 1 allow-stateless
> @@ -10240,13 +10286,14 @@ check ovn-nbctl --wait=hv sync
> OVS_WAIT_UNTIL([ovs-ofctl -O OpenFlow13 dump-groups br-int | \
> grep 'nat(dst=\[[fd12::2\]]:80)'])
>
> -# should not dnat so will not be able to connect
> -AT_CHECK([ip netns exec foo1 curl http://[[fd30::2]] --retry 3 --max-time
> 1], [28], [ignore], [ignore])
> -#
> -# check conntrack zone has no tcp entry
> +# now check with VIP
> +AT_CHECK([ip netns exec foo1 wget http://[[fd30::2]] -t 3 -T 1], [0],
> [ignore], [ignore])
> +
> +# check conntrack zone has tcp entry
> AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/dump-conntrack zone=$zone_id | \
> FORMAT_CT(fd30::2) | grep -v fe80 | \
> sed -e 's/zone=[[0-9]]*/zone=<cleared>/'], [0], [dnl
> +tcp,orig=(src=fd11::2,dst=fd30::2,sport=<cleared>,dport=<cleared>),reply=(src=fd12::2,dst=fd11::2,sport=<cleared>,dport=<cleared>),zone=<cleared>,mark=2,protoinfo=(state=<cleared>)
> ])
>
> AT_CHECK([ovs-appctl dpctl/flush-conntrack])
>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Alexandra.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Dumitru
>
>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Alexandra.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
