Hi, Thanks all! I will start working on it pretty soon then.
> Lucas, I support you moving forward with 1), because: > a) it is more simple and straightforward, yet the configuration on > chassis won't (shouldn't) create compatibility issue > b) it doesn't conflict with further optimization with 2) or 3) on top > of it when needed in the future > That's very true. This work is about creating a logical separation for Chassis and 2) and 3) is mostly about how the tunnels are formed. > P.S. Just a comment on the troubleshooting concerns. It seems to me 2) > doesn't necessarily increase difficulty of trouble-shooting: if lport > A and lport B cannot communicate, the first step to check should > always be making sure the logical datapath allows them to talk, > regardless of the approaches, and if the answer is yes, you know the > tunnel is expected between the chassises. For monitoring, tunnels do > not have states unless BFD is enabled (for GW HA), so maybe checking > on BFD failure status itself is sufficient. > Good points! Cheers, Lucas _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
