[vpp-dev] Rejecting large frequency change

2021-08-05 Thread Gudimetla, Leela Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Hello,

We have started seeing the below warning message coming continuously. Traffic 
is running on several vhost-ports and physical ports. These messages are coming 
even after a restart with a slow rate.

VPP clib_warning: clib_time_verify_frequency:248: Rejecting large frequency 
change of 1.01%

Does this mean something ?

Thanks,
Leela sankar

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#19924): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/19924
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/84701132/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [vpp-dev] MPLS protection

2021-07-26 Thread Gudimetla, Leela Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Could someone please respond to the specific question that I have described 
below?

Thanks,
Leela sankar

From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io  on behalf of Gudimetla, Leela 
Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Date: Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 9:42 AM
To: Neale Ranns , vpp-dev@lists.fd.io 
Subject: [**EXTERNAL**] Re: [vpp-dev] MPLS protection
Thanks Neale for responding.
“HA LSP” –  I was referring to primary LSP (Label Switching Path) and backup 
LSP. There can be two or more label encaps configured as a group for each 
label-level in the packet header. In that configuration group, one label will 
refer to primary next-hop and others will refer to backup next-hops. The backup 
label will be used if primary next-hop fails for some reason. And this 
protection-group can be extended to all the label-levels in the label-stack in 
the packet header.

Hope this is clear (on a high-level, it talks about label protection and 
support the protection hierarchically for all the label-levels in the label 
stack in the packet header).

Regards,
Leela sankar

From: Neale Ranns 
Date: Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 1:01 AM
To: Gudimetla, Leela Sankar , vpp-dev@lists.fd.io 

Subject: [**EXTERNAL**] Re: MPLS protection
Hi Leela,

There’s no FRR. I don’t know what a HA LSP would be.
Here’s the docs on what fast convergence support there is:
  
https://github.com/FDio/vpp/blob/master/docs/gettingstarted/developers/fib20/fastconvergence.rst
 
[github.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/FDio/vpp/blob/master/docs/gettingstarted/developers/fib20/fastconvergence.rst__;!!OSsGDw!b_tQQAd3G8uc4uuGWxUD76doCnD_dEmX62U6vRm-ZHAtHvU_SwPLyFBFTX2Pvg$>

/neale


From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io  on behalf of Gudimetla, Leela 
Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Date: Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 20:57
To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io 
Subject: [vpp-dev] MPLS protection
Hello,

I am trying out MPLS configurations to test what all features are supported 
currently on stable 1908.

I don’t see protection for LSP like HA or FRR support explicitly. So I am 
wondering if it is supported yet. Or I may be missing something.

Can someone please share (documentation, code) what all protection mechanism 
supported for MPLS?

Thanks,
Leela sankar

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#19873): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/19873
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/84209148/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [vpp-dev] MPLS protection

2021-07-15 Thread Gudimetla, Leela Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Thanks Neale for responding.
“HA LSP” –  I was referring to primary LSP (Label Switching Path) and backup 
LSP. There can be two or more label encaps configured as a group for each 
label-level in the packet header. In that configuration group, one label will 
refer to primary next-hop and others will refer to backup next-hops. The backup 
label will be used if primary next-hop fails for some reason. And this 
protection-group can be extended to all the label-levels in the label-stack in 
the packet header.

Hope this is clear (on a high-level, it talks about label protection and 
support the protection hierarchically for all the label-levels in the label 
stack in the packet header).

Regards,
Leela sankar

From: Neale Ranns 
Date: Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 1:01 AM
To: Gudimetla, Leela Sankar , vpp-dev@lists.fd.io 

Subject: [**EXTERNAL**] Re: MPLS protection
Hi Leela,

There’s no FRR. I don’t know what a HA LSP would be.
Here’s the docs on what fast convergence support there is:
  
https://github.com/FDio/vpp/blob/master/docs/gettingstarted/developers/fib20/fastconvergence.rst
 
[github.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/FDio/vpp/blob/master/docs/gettingstarted/developers/fib20/fastconvergence.rst__;!!OSsGDw!b_tQQAd3G8uc4uuGWxUD76doCnD_dEmX62U6vRm-ZHAtHvU_SwPLyFBFTX2Pvg$>

/neale


From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io  on behalf of Gudimetla, Leela 
Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Date: Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 20:57
To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io 
Subject: [vpp-dev] MPLS protection
Hello,

I am trying out MPLS configurations to test what all features are supported 
currently on stable 1908.

I don’t see protection for LSP like HA or FRR support explicitly. So I am 
wondering if it is supported yet. Or I may be missing something.

Can someone please share (documentation, code) what all protection mechanism 
supported for MPLS?

Thanks,
Leela sankar

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#19789): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/19789
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/84209148/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[vpp-dev] MPLS protection

2021-07-14 Thread Gudimetla, Leela Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Hello,

I am trying out MPLS configurations to test what all features are supported 
currently on stable 1908.

I don’t see protection for LSP like HA or FRR support explicitly. So I am 
wondering if it is supported yet. Or I may be missing something.

Can someone please share (documentation, code) what all protection mechanism 
supported for MPLS?

Thanks,
Leela sankar

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#19769): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/19769
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/84209148/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [**EXTERNAL**] [vpp-dev] VPP fast-path vs slow-path

2020-06-03 Thread Gudimetla, Leela Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Gentle reminder on this. Any info would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Leela sankar Gudimetla
Embedded Software Engineer 3 |  Ciena
San Jose, CA, USA
M | +1.408.904.2160
[Ciena Logo]<https://www.ciena.com/?src=emailsig>


From:  on behalf of "Gudimetla, Leela Sankar via 
lists.fd.io" 
Reply-To: Leela Gudimetla 
Date: Monday, June 1, 2020 at 3:28 PM
To: "vpp-dev@lists.fd.io" 
Subject: [**EXTERNAL**] [vpp-dev] VPP fast-path vs slow-path

Hi,

I came across a comment in the file src/vnet/ethernet/node.c regarding 
fast-path vs slow-path.

   /* fastpath - in l3 mode hadles ip4, ip6 and mpls packets, other packets
   are considered as slowpath, in l2 mode all untagged packets are
   considered as fastpath */

This makes me wondering about the VPP view of fast-path vs slow-path.
Based on the comment, does it mean that the processing of all untagged and 
L3-packets is called as fast-path? and rest all packets are considered as 
slow-path?

Based on some of the networking ASICs,  any packet (irrespective of L2 or L3) 
that is processed inside the packet-pipeline from rx-interface to tx-interface 
is called as fast-path and if a packet is punted to CPU for further processing 
is called as slow-path.

This may not be a generic or standard definition, but wrt networking switches 
and routers, I see this description is used more widely.
So, I am wondering if VPP has a different description/view on it.

Can someone please share what is the VPP’s view on fast-path vs slow-path? Does 
it differ based on the received packet type i.e. L2 vs L3?

Thanks,
Leela sankar

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#16636): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/16636
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/74653075/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub  [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[vpp-dev] VPP fast-path vs slow-path

2020-06-01 Thread Gudimetla, Leela Sankar via lists.fd.io 
Hi,

I came across a comment in the file src/vnet/ethernet/node.c regarding 
fast-path vs slow-path.

   /* fastpath - in l3 mode hadles ip4, ip6 and mpls packets, other packets
   are considered as slowpath, in l2 mode all untagged packets are
   considered as fastpath */

This makes me wondering about the VPP view of fast-path vs slow-path.
Based on the comment, does it mean that the processing of all untagged and 
L3-packets is called as fast-path? and rest all packets are considered as 
slow-path?

Based on some of the networking ASICs,  any packet (irrespective of L2 or L3) 
that is processed inside the packet-pipeline from rx-interface to tx-interface 
is called as fast-path and if a packet is punted to CPU for further processing 
is called as slow-path.

This may not be a generic or standard definition, but wrt networking switches 
and routers, I see this description is used more widely.
So, I am wondering if VPP has a different description/view on it.

Can someone please share what is the VPP’s view on fast-path vs slow-path? Does 
it differ based on the received packet type i.e. L2 vs L3?

Thanks,
Leela sankar

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#16601): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/16601
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/74616491/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub  [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[vpp-dev] Tap connect CLI

2020-03-12 Thread Gudimetla, Leela Sankar via Lists.Fd.Io 
Hi,

I see that the tap connect CLI has been deprecated which was used for creating 
a pair of interfaces between container and host.
Is there any other CLI/mechanism available in VPP-1908 to achieve the same?

Thanks,
Leela sankar Gudimetla
Embedded Software Engineer 3 |  Ciena
San Jose, CA, USA
M | +1.408.904.2160
[Ciena Logo]

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#15767): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/15767
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/71914759/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub  [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-