> On Aug 8, 2016, at 4:45 AM, Jerome Eichler wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> although there are few blogs on the web regarding this matter my problem
> cannot be resolved following them.
>
> My setup:
> XenServer 7.0 with 2 NICs onboard. NIC1 (eth1) is connected to my Juniper
> On Aug 8, 2016, at 2:27 AM, 破冰者 <852187...@qq.com> wrote:
>
> hi,
> I create a virtual machine, the virtual machine has two pieces of card,
> the two pieces of card to use is bridging mode, and the two pieces of card
> connected to a OVS, in OVS without any flow table entries, why would
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Daniel Levy wrote:
> When synching from a database that doesn't exist, the entire database will
> wipe. This is obviously very bad, because synching is typically used to
> handle scenarios where a service is unreachable.
>
> Actions:
> 1. Start
Hi Mauricio,
After applying the patch, the packets are flowing to the VM now.
However, even at lower bandwidth, it always has a small percentage of frame
loss.
Is this expected behavior?
Thanks,
Charlie
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Charlie Li wrote:
> Thanks
When synching from a database that doesn't exist, the entire database will wipe. This is obviously very bad, because synching is typically used to handle scenarios where a service is unreachable.
Actions:1. Start ovn-central via 'service ovn-central start'2. Add an item to the database via
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Lance Richardson
wrote:
> I've been doing some investigation into the "Limiting the impact of
> a compromised chassis" issue described in ovn/TODO. These are some initial
> thoughts, posting here for feedback and any other ideas folks might
No, there's nothing special about VXLAN.
There should no measurable overhead.
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 11:08:53PM +0530, Kapil Adhikesavalu wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> I did a brief trial with 'groups' before mailing the list. Wanted to check
> if there are other alternatives specific to vxlan.
>
>
Hi Ben,
I did a brief trial with 'groups' before mailing the list. Wanted to check
if there are other alternatives specific to vxlan.
Thanks for confirming. Will there be any overhead in using 1 group for each
tunnel in a scaled environment.
Regards
Kapil
Thanks
Kapil
On 08-Aug-2016 9:54 PM,
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 04:49:49PM +0530, Kapil Adhikesavalu wrote:
> Want to check if there is an alternate way to append a output port to the
> existing flow.
>
>
>
> For example,
>
>
>
> Existing flow:
>
> cookie=0x0, duration=14279.412s, table=0, n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
>
Dear all,
although there are few blogs on the web regarding this matter my problem
cannot be resolved following them.
My setup:
XenServer 7.0 with 2 NICs onboard. NIC1 (eth1) is connected to my Juniper
switch (EX-4200-48T). At this Juniper-Port all traffic in my network is
being mirrored
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 12:51:06PM +0200, Amrane Ait Zeouay wrote:
> Thank you for your answer, but i want to know if i can disable sending the
> flow from userspace to datapath so that the datapath send all packets to
> the userspace, even it will be slow, because i implemented a new field in
>
Thank you for your answer, but i want to know if i can disable sending the
flow from userspace to datapath so that the datapath send all packets to
the userspace, even it will be slow, because i implemented a new field in
userspace and it's not implemented in datapath.
Thank you.
2016-08-08
Hi Amrane, that’s the expected behavior.
The 1st packet of a flow goes up to userspace – and there’s a context switch
for that. After classification 1 cache entry will be added in the megaflow
table and another cache entry into the microflow table, both these 2 caches are
into the kernel. So
Hi,
Is there a way to send packets to userspace and stopping userspace from
sending flows to datapath, because i want all my packets to be treated in
userspace, because when i send the first packet it goes to userspace and
after that it doesn't. so can you help me.
Thank you and have a nice say,
14 matches
Mail list logo