On 06/10/15 at 01:43pm, Shrijeet Mukherjee wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:15 AM, Thomas Graf tg...@suug.ch wrote:
Do I understand this correctly that swp* represent veth pairs?
Why do you have distinct addresses on each peer of the pair?
Are the addresses in N2 and N3 considered private
On 06/08/15 at 11:35am, Shrijeet Mukherjee wrote:
[...]
model with some performance paths that need optimization. (Specifically
the output route selector that Roopa, Robert, Thomas and EricB are
currently discussing on the MPLS thread)
Thanks for posting these patches just in time. This
Le 08/06/2015 20:35, Shrijeet Mukherjee a écrit :
From: Shrijeet Mukherjee s...@cumulusnetworks.com
In the context of internet scale routing a requirement that always
comes up is the need to partition the available routing tables into
disjoint routing planes. A specific use case is the
Le 09/06/2015 16:21, David Ahern a écrit :
Hi Nicolas:
On 6/9/15 2:58 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
I'm not really in favor of the name 'vrf'. This term is very
controversial and
having a consensus of what is/contains a 'vrf' is quite impossible.
There was already a lot of discussions about this
Hi Nicolas:
On 6/9/15 2:58 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
I'm not really in favor of the name 'vrf'. This term is very
controversial and
having a consensus of what is/contains a 'vrf' is quite impossible.
There was already a lot of discussions about this topic on quagga ml
that show
that everybody
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Nicolas Dichtel
nicolas.dich...@6wind.com wrote:
Le 09/06/2015 16:21, David Ahern a écrit :
Hi Nicolas:
On 6/9/15 2:58 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
I'm not really in favor of the name 'vrf'. This term is very
controversial and
having a consensus of what
Le 09/06/2015 12:15, Thomas Graf a écrit :
On 06/08/15 at 11:35am, Shrijeet Mukherjee wrote:
[...]
model with some performance paths that need optimization. (Specifically
the output route selector that Roopa, Robert, Thomas and EricB are
currently discussing on the MPLS thread)
Thanks for
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015, at 14:30, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
Le 09/06/2015 12:15, Thomas Graf a écrit :
On 06/08/15 at 11:35am, Shrijeet Mukherjee wrote:
[...]
model with some performance paths that need optimization. (Specifically
the output route selector that Roopa, Robert, Thomas and EricB
On 6/8/15 12:35 PM, Shrijeet Mukherjee wrote:
5. Debugging is built-in as tcpdump and counters on the VRF device
works as is.
Is the intent that something like this
tcpdump -i vrf0
can be used to see vrf traffic?
vrf_handle_frame only bumps counters; it does not switch skb-dev to the
Good catch, as you know I used to have the device getting modified in
the RX path and that made it all work
generic ip_rcv will need a fix to make RX visible to tcpdump, but yes,
that is the goal.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 12:13 PM, David Ahern dsah...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/8/15 12:35 PM, Shrijeet
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015, at 21:13, David Ahern wrote:
On 6/8/15 12:35 PM, Shrijeet Mukherjee wrote:
5. Debugging is built-in as tcpdump and counters on the VRF device
works as is.
Is the intent that something like this
tcpdump -i vrf0
can be used to see vrf traffic?
11 matches
Mail list logo
