On Thu, 2017-05-11 at 16:16 -0700, Andy Zhou wrote:
> When multiple bridges connects to the same controller, the controller
> status should be maintained separately for each bridge. Current
> logic pushes status updates only based on the connection string,
> which is the same across multiple
When multiple bridges connects to the same controller, the controller
status should be maintained separately for each bridge. Current
logic pushes status updates only based on the connection string,
which is the same across multiple bridges when connecting to the
same controller.
Report-at:
The OVN ingress pipeline for a logical switch is maxed out at 16 stages.
This patch takes the simple approach of starting the ingress pipeline at
table 8 rather than table 16, and starting the egress pipeline at
table 40 rather than table 48.
Signed-off-by: Mickey Spiegel
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 11:05 AM, John McDowall <
jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote:
> With the addition of the DNS stages there are no entries left in the
> PIPELINE_STAGE, SWITCH IN table. I need one for SFC. As this is a core
> part of the infrastructure I do not want to make changes
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Joe Stringer wrote:
> On 10 May 2017 at 17:08, Andy Zhou wrote:
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Joe Stringer wrote:
>>> On 10 May 2017 at 12:59, Andy Zhou wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 7:56 AM,
Hi,
A gentle follow up to my previous email.
Please share your thoughts so that we can proceed accordingly.
Awaiting your response.
Best regards,
Eva
From: Eva Smith [mailto:eva.sm...@leadspioneer.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 3:20 PM
To: 'd...@openvswitch.org'
With the addition of the DNS stages there are no entries left in the
PIPELINE_STAGE, SWITCH IN table. I need one for SFC. As this is a core part of
the infrastructure I do not want to make changes without advice from the core
OVN team.
What is the best approach?
Regards
John
Hi Satya,
I haven't checked the OF1.5 spec with this, yet. Just saw a few things.
Thanks for the contribution!
Ben Pfaff writes:
> From: Satya Valli
>
Missing signed-off-by line. Also, it would be good to describe exactly
which flow stat types are
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 7:57 AM, William Tu wrote:
> [snip]
Picking up the topic of trunc on patch port.
Instead of banning trunc output to a patch port, any down side of
translating that
to trunc, clone()? After all, native tunneling
looks a lot
On 11 May 2017 at 09:04, Zoltán Balogh wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> Thank you for your comments! Please, find my answers below.
>
>> I had trouble trying to review this, in part because I felt like
>> changes to fix multiple issues are being placed into one patch. If
>> there
[ View in browser ]( http://r.newsletter.bonescamail.nl/nru6rcrioatrf.html
)
SPECIAL OFFER :
CALIFORNIAN SQUID / LOLIGO USA 12 X 1 KILO
1 BOX € 5,49 * 10 BOX € 5,29 * PALET (72 BOX) € 4,99 PER KILO!!
CUTTLEFISH / SEPIA WHOLE CLEAN IQF 1-2 PC/KG 10 KILO INDIA
1 BOX € 6,49 * 10
On 10 May 2017 at 17:08, Andy Zhou wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Joe Stringer wrote:
>> On 10 May 2017 at 12:59, Andy Zhou wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 7:56 AM, William Tu wrote:
> It may be cleaner if we add
Hi Joe,
Thank you for your comments! Please, find my answers below.
> I had trouble trying to review this, in part because I felt like
> changes to fix multiple issues are being placed into one patch. If
> there are separate issues being addressed, each issue should be fixed
> in a separate
[snip]
>>> Picking up the topic of trunc on patch port.
>>>
>>> Instead of banning trunc output to a patch port, any down side of
>>> translating that
>>> to trunc, clone()? After all, native tunneling
>>> looks a lot like patch port conceptually.
>>
>> How does clone() interact with trunc() in
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Darrell Ball wrote:
> What are the use case(s) of truncate “outside” of sampling/mirroring ?
> The use of truncation in the context of sampling/mirroring is well known.
>
I don't know any other use cases outside sampling/mirroring.
Truncate the
I guess that this is meant as a kind of "pull request", even though it
does not say that. I converted it to emails and posted them to the
mailing list in the usual way:
https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2017-May/332344.html
From: Satya Valli
---
lib/ox-stat.c | 232 ++
lib/ox-stat.h | 31
2 files changed, 263 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 lib/ox-stat.c
create mode 100644 lib/ox-stat.h
diff --git a/lib/ox-stat.c
From: Satya Valli
---
include/openflow/openflow-1.5.h | 48 +
include/openvswitch/ofp-msgs.h | 6 ++
lib/automake.mk | 2 ++
lib/ofp-parse.c | 45 +-
Hi,
Here some usb wifi devices connect to host through an usb hub on centos
linux release 7.2.1511.
Execute "lsusb":
Bus 002 Device 005: ID 0557:2419 ATEN International Co., Ltd
Bus 002 Device 004: ID 0557:7000 ATEN International Co., Ltd Hub
Bus 002 Device 003:
> Previously if there is no available (non-isolated) pmd on the numa node
> for a port then the port is not polled at all. This can result in a non-
> operational system until such time as nics are physically repositioned. It
> is preferable to operate with a pmd on the 'wrong' numa node albeit
Branch: refs/heads/dev
Home: https://github.com/satyavalli/OVS_OF1.5_EXT334_Review
Commit: 83f024955e560fa36315121d481b62db432c6891
https://github.com/satyavalli/OVS_OF1.5_EXT334_Review/commit/83f024955e560fa36315121d481b62db432c6891
Author: Satya Valli
This patch implements support for per-flow TCP IPFIX counters. It's based on RFC
5102, section 5.10.
Signed-off-by: Przemyslaw Szczerbik
---
ofproto/ofproto-dpif-ipfix.c | 144 +--
1 file changed, 126 insertions(+), 18
22 matches
Mail list logo