yes of curse but not now because i am at my job now and haven't access to
source code, i will do this a few hours later.
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Murphy McCauley <murphy.mccau...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Generally speaking, there's only ever one active connection to a switch at
> a time.
>
> Can you share a minimal version of your code which demonstrates the issue?
>
> -- Murphy
>
> On May 24, 2014, at 10:20 PM, farshad tajedin <farshad.taje...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> as i said before in my controller code i used two connection to e_s1
> sequentially one for installing flow entry and next connection for sending
> packet out message. if connecting to switches done by thread programming so
> these message sending parallel, is these parallel message to one switch
> make problem?
>
>
> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Murphy McCauley <
> murphy.mccau...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It's implemented by a recoco Task as described in the POX manual.
>> Beneath that, there's a thread, but then... isn't there always?
>>
>> -- Murphy
>>
>> On May 24, 2014, at 4:04 AM, farshad tajedin <farshad.taje...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> is connection to switch implemented by thread?
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Murphy McCauley <
>> murphy.mccau...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> How about disabling enough links in your topology so that it doesn't
>>> have loops and then trying? (I'm wondering if the second one has looped
>>> back to where it started somehow.)
>>>
>>> Another thought would be to wireshark all the ports of the switch where
>>> you're seeing two of these packets. Do you actually see the packet arrive
>>> twice? Leave twice? Etc.
>>>
>>> -- Murphy
>>>
>>> On May 23, 2014, at 9:51 PM, farshad tajedin <farshad.taje...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> yes both of them are same except buffer id , i do this in mininet
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 2:53 PM, farshad tajedin <
>>> farshad.taje...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> yes both of them are same except buffer id , i do this in mininet
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Murphy McCauley <
>>>> murphy.mccau...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Are the packet-in messages and their payloads 100% identical?
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you doing this on real hardware, or in Mininet, or... ?
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Murphy
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 22, 2014, at 11:13 PM, farshad tajedin <
>>>>> farshad.taje...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> hi murphy
>>>>> i have a path between two hosts(h1 and h2) in a data center,when i
>>>>> ping h2 from h1 since switches on this path have no flow entry for route
>>>>> icmp packet to h2 , the edge switch that h1 connected to it(e_s1) ,send
>>>>> icmp packet to controller. in controller i handle it and i add flow entry
>>>>> to each switch on this path in my controller code and at last send packet
>>>>> out msg to e_s1 to forward this packet. during this action (ping h2 from
>>>>> h1) i capture traffic of my network by wireshark and i see packet in msg
>>>>> from e_s1 two times sends to controller that i expect packet in msg must
>>>>> send once.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 4:30 AM, Murphy McCauley <
>>>>> murphy.mccau...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you'll need to provide a lot more detail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you saying that you're trying to proactively insert all the rules
>>>>>> into the switch when it connects, but you're getting packet-ins (from
>>>>>> table
>>>>>> misses) anyway and you're not expecting them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How do packet-outs factor in here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Murphy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 22, 2014, at 5:45 AM, farshad tajedin <
>>>>>> farshad.taje...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i must say that i use 1.add flow message and 2.packet out message
>>>>>> sequensialy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 3:17 PM, farshad tajedin <
>>>>>> farshad.taje...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hi all
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i have a fat-tree topology, when i ping a host from another host i
>>>>>>> found that first host 2 times send packet in message to controller and i
>>>>>>> dont know why. can anybody help me ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> P.S i use core.openflow.addListenerByName("ConnectionUp",
>>>>>>> start_switch) for event handling.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Farshad Tajedin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Farshad Tajedin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Farshad Tajedin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards
>>>>
>>>> Farshad Tajedin
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>> Farshad Tajedin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Farshad Tajedin
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
>
> Farshad Tajedin
>
>
>
--
Best Regards
Farshad Tajedin
