Dave/Neale,
Sharing any details would help to understand better on top of ‘use the force
and read the source’.
Thanks,
Leela sankar
From: on behalf of Leela Gudimetla
Date: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 at 11:35 AM
To: "vpp-dev@lists.fd.io"
Subject: [**EXTERNAL**] [vpp-dev] Understanding
Hi Manuel,
Could you try modifying your config with something like below?
By the way, I am not sure you need to set any arp entries, I am assuming
you have connected back-to-back the interfaces with IPs in the
192.168.30.0/24 net.
You can check with 'show ip arp' that you have entries for the
See https://youtu.be/wmp3X8NipEM...
HTH... Dave
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#12197): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/12197
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/29682831/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Hello All,
I have a use case with VPP as below.
1. Need to send customized packets (similar to some L3 control packets. ARP,
ICMP, etc) from ‘my-node’ to loopback.
2. The loopback interface is attached to a bridge-domain. So, the customized
packets need to be either flooded in the
> On 6 Feb 2019, at 05:37, amir...@rad.com wrote:
>
> Thanks,
> Is there any option to attach \ detach interface from the VPP (without
> restarting the service) ?
With DPDK interfaces, no.
Native AVF driver supports that but that is intel x722/xl710/x710/xxv710 only
(and 100G intel E810
Thanks,
Is there any option to attach \ detach interface from the VPP (without
restarting the service) ?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#12194): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/12194
Mute This Topic:
> On 5 Feb 2019, at 05:08, amir...@rad.com wrote:
>
> Hi Damjan,
>
> My main goal is to use the PF inside the VPP using DPDK in addition to SR-IOV
> connection to the VMs.
> Currently (before enabling SR-IOV VFs ) all interfaces is connected to VPP
> with DPDK using VFIO-PCI driver.
> I've
Hi Matus,
That's unfortunate.
That would work as an immediate solution. I've considered a solution like that,
but I'm worried it might be wasteful. I considered that very setup when I was
contemplating a sort of hybrid NAT between dynamic NAT and CGN. In CGN, just as
we allocate a number of
Hi,
There is no plan to implement PAP.
There is one solution in my mind “port block allocation”. When creating user
(first session), instead of allocating single port multiple ports of single IP
address are allocated for given user. Block size should be configurable and
will be free when
After reading Cisco's implementation for PAP for IOS XE, it seems they limit
the number of local addresses per global address. The default is 120 local
addresses per global address. That way we can make sure that there are never
more than a certain number of local users per global IP, but can
Hi Ole,
After register via the api , then RA packets to be consumed by our node, or
sent futher down the line to any next node in VPP ? (on your existing
thread)
Thanks,
Chetan Bhasin
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:57 PM Ole Troan wrote:
> Chetan,
>
> > Is there a way by which I can get RA
Hi Matus,
Thanks once again.
That seems to be it. After reading RFC4787 section 4.1 REQ 1, their mention of
PAP (Paired-Address-Pooling) seems to be on-point.
As they mention:
>
> NATs that use an "IP address pooling" behavior of "Arbitrary" can cause
> issues for applications that use
Hi,
There is no guarantee that user always get same external address if you have
multiple external addresses. What you are referring to mean standard/vanilla
NAT use endpoint-independent mapping (RFC4787 section 4.1.) and filtering
(RFC4787 section 5.), something different. What you want is
See attached files, setup is taking place in the scripts via vppctl instead of
using the 'exec path_to_file' used in startup.cnf
Let me know if you see anything suspicious
BR,
Manuel
start_vpp_ipsec_board_a_xaui30_p2.sh
Description: application/shellscript
Hi Matus,
Thanks for the response!
Ah, I see, that makes more sense as to why we check against the FIB.
However, if we just pick a random port (per protocol) from the "first address
with some available ports" (dictated by the "busy ports" I presume), how does
this ensure that a user ever gets
Hi,
Default assignment algorithm support address per fib (tenant)
https://wiki.fd.io/view/VPP/NAT#NAT44_add_pool_address_for_specific_tenant
It just pick random port (per protocol) from first address with some available
ports. In case of multithread ports a divided between worker threads.
16 matches
Mail list logo
