Hi Ben, Thanks for your response. Please see below inline.
Regards, Vivek -----Original Message----- From: Ben Pfaff [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 9:24 PM To: Vivek Srivastava V Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] BFD with 'option : remote_ip = flow' On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 08:48:20AM +0000, Vivek Srivastava V wrote: > 1. Is there any way to configure/manage BFD sessions to destinations, > independent of the tunnel port/interface created? Not currently. If you have a good idea for how to extend the OVS BFD support to be more flexible, we'd accept patches. [Viveks] We are planning to create a separate table/schema for maintaining independent BFD sessions. An entry in this BFD table can be identified by a session ID generated/configured and will have same columns as we have for BFD in interface table. In future we can choose to remove the BFD related fields from interface table and use a reference (session_id) from the BFD table. WDYT? > 2. Does OVS support multi-hop BFD? In roadmap? No. I hadn't heard of multi-hop BFD before, so I looked around a bit and found RFC 5883. That RFC, though, doesn't really provide a specification for how to do this. Is there a detailed specification somewhere else? [Viveks] Unfortunately I also couldn't find any implementation specific details about multihop BFD, other than RFC 5883 and some configuration related info available on the net. What I could gather is that it is mostly same as onehop BFD, with some additional considerations- 1. uses different UDP destination port 4784 (MUST) 2. suggests session authentication (SHOULD) 3. De-multiplexing (applicable only in case of multiple BFD sessions between same pair of TEPs) So I think we should be good with supporting the first item initially. _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
