On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 03:06:49PM -0800, Han Zhou wrote: > On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 2:34 PM Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 11:01:20PM -0800, Han Zhou wrote: > > > Now comes to my question. The time when all the GW BFD status went down > > > matches perfectly with the time when the port number 65535 is used. > > > However, I still didn't understand why would using the port number 65535 > > > cause BFD status down on all tunnels (to other GWs and all hypervisors). > > > Could someone help explain here, so that we are confident that there is > no > > > other potential problems? > > > > It's not obvious to me why it would cause a BFD problem. Is it > > difficult to look into it? > > It was on a live environment. It was recovered after quickly restart OVS. > From the logs I can't find out more hints. In a test environment I could > reproduced the port number 65535 problem easily but it didn't triggered the > tunnel BFD status down problem. I may try more to reproduce and debug, but > in general what could cause all BFD status down (while network connection > to the node is fine).
My first thought is something that keeps the BFD thread from receiving or sending BFD packets. Maybe the BFD thread is confused by the out-of-range port number somehow. _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
