Hi,
In my C++ NOX (Zaku) app I would like to make sure that a flow is installed on
the switch. Having no better solution, I send a barrier request right after the
flow_mod, and then wait for either an error, or a barrier reply.
For this I register the flow_mod's and barrier's xids, and then
I'd have to look into it to be sure, but I think the scenario you describe may
well be possible.
However... couldn't you just put the creation/registration of the PendingFlow
*before* sending either of the commands?
-- Murphy
On Sep 12, 2011, at 7:10 AM, Zoltán Lajos Kis wrote:
Hi,
In
Hello everybody,
I have NOX running at my host pc and two openvswitch switches running on two
different VirtualBox virtual machines. I created a bridge between the two
VMs and set NOX as controller of this bridge.
At my host, I run ./nox_core -v -i ptcp:2525 monitoring pyswitch and
./nox-gui.
Hi Shrutarshi,
I am not sure why you would need to get the IP address on the switch
so as to write a NAT application. The IP address assigned to the
switch/NAT box can be logical (i.e., the controller knows about it and
not the switch). The rewriting of the IP addresses, transport ports,
etc.
Hi,
I have the same question, but my scenario is different. If you have an
openflow switch and want it to act like a router, you have to answer
arp replies and you need to know each IP address assigned to each
switch interface.
If you don't, you have to include every IP of every interface of
It looks like you're missing Qt's sqlite interface. Try installing it. On
Ubuntu I think this is in the libqt4-sql-sqlite package.
I think to get links to show up, you'll need to run discovery as well, and you
should probably run nox_core with -v -v:
./nox_core -v -v -i ptcp:2525 monitoring
I could do that, but it probably gets me into the territory of volatiles - and
perhaps locks:
...
pendingFlow = new PendingFlow(mod-header-xid, barrier-xid);
send_openflow_command(datapath_id, mod-header, true);
if (pendingFlow != NULL) {
send_openflow_command(datapath_id, barrier, true);
}
I'd just send both commands regardless and only ever look at pendingFlow again
in the barrier and error handlers. I think that sidesteps the need to worry
about synchronization.
At any rate, good luck. :)
-- Murphy
On Sep 12, 2011, at 10:44 PM, Zoltán Lajos Kis wrote:
I could do that, but
