On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 04:53:44PM +0900, Nobuhiro MIKI wrote: > 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.
Hi Ilya, I've reimplemented it with a port-based approach, please see the patch below: https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2022-July/395536.html The design is similar to other tunnel ports like VXLAN and GRE. Could you please review it when you have time? Best Regards, Nobuhiro Miki _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
