Would it make more sense to reverse this part of the design? I was thinking of
having each chassis its own IPv4/IPv6 address used for next-hop in
announcements and OF flows installed to direct BGP control packets over to the
host system, in a similar way how localport is used today for
Hi,
I'm trying to track down some issue resulting in BFD session timeouts in our
deployment.
What I'm seeing is that (seemingly) randomly one chassis stops sending BFD
packets to some of its neighbors (seemingly one at a time, and it seems one
chassis is more prone to that behavior
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 2:45 PM Luis Tomas Bolivar
wrote:
> Of course we are fully open to redesign it if there is a better approach!
> And that was indeed the intention when linking to the current efforts,
> figure out if that was a "valid" way of doing it, and how it can be
>
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 3:20 PM Krzysztof Klimonda <
kklimo...@syntaxhighlighted.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021, at 14:45, Luis Tomas Bolivar wrote:
>
> Of course we are fully open to redesign it if there is a better approach!
> And that was indeed the intention when linking to the current
Hi Krzysztof,
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 12:54 PM Krzysztof Klimonda <
kklimo...@syntaxhighlighted.com> wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
> I haven't yet had time to give it a try in our lab, but from reading your
> blog posts I have a quick question. How does it work when either DPDK or
> NIC offload is used
Of course we are fully open to redesign it if there is a better approach!
And that was indeed the intention when linking to the current efforts,
figure out if that was a "valid" way of doing it, and how it can be
improved/redesigned. The main idea behind the current design was not to
need
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021, at 14:45, Luis Tomas Bolivar wrote:
> Of course we are fully open to redesign it if there is a better approach! And
> that was indeed the intention when linking to the current efforts, figure out
> if that was a "valid" way of doing it, and how it can be
Hi Luis,
I haven't yet had time to give it a try in our lab, but from reading your blog
posts I have a quick question. How does it work when either DPDK or NIC offload
is used for OVN traffic? It seems you are (de-)encapsulating traffic on chassis
nodes by routing them through kernel - is this
Hi Daniel,
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021, at 15:19, Daniel Alvarez Sanchez wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 2:45 PM Luis Tomas Bolivar
> wrote:
> > Of course we are fully open to redesign it if there is a better approach!
> > And that was indeed the intention when linking to the current efforts,
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021, at 19:15, Mark Gray wrote:
> On 16/03/2021 15:41, Krzysztof Klimonda wrote:
> > Yes, that seems to be prerequisite (or one of prerequisites) for keeping
> > current DPDK / offload capabilities, as far as I understand. By Proxy
> > ARP/NDP I think you mean responding to
Hi all,
I'm using ovs-ctl [Open vSwitch version: v2.11.2] to do ovs hot
upgrading depending on the
guide[https://docs.openvswitch.org/en/latest/intro/install/general/?highlight=hot%20upgrade#hot-upgrading].
Only userspace daemon
should be upgraded in my situation, and ovsdb restart command was
On 16/03/2021 15:41, Krzysztof Klimonda wrote:
> Yes, that seems to be prerequisite (or one of prerequisites) for keeping
> current DPDK / offload capabilities, as far as I understand. By Proxy ARP/NDP
> I think you mean responding to ARP and NDP on behalf of the system where FRR
> is running?
12 matches
Mail list logo
