On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 05:59:59PM +0200, Ilya Maximets wrote: > Hi. Sorry for the late reply. > > The feature might be interesting indeed, but the port-based implementation > is preferred. Creating and maintaining new actions is much more difficult > and all other lightweight-tunnel-based stuff is implemented as tunnel ports, > not separate actions. So, it's better to re-use the common infrastructure.
Hi Ilya, Thank you for your helpful advice. I'll plan and re-implement this feature using a port-based approach. Then I'll test whether it achieves our requirements, e.g. how flexible it is to control SIDs. It may take a few weeks, but let me discuss it again in this ML. Best Regards, Nobuhiro Miki _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
