Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

15:34 > To: "Neale Ranns (nranns)" <nra...@cisco.com <mailto:nra...@cisco.com>>, Jon > Loeliger <j...@netgate.com <mailto:j...@netgate.com>> > Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>> > Subject: RE: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

gt; > > *From: *"John Lo (loj)" <l...@cisco.com> > *Date: *Wednesday, 7 February 2018 at 15:34 > *To: *"Neale Ranns (nranns)" <nra...@cisco.com>, Jon Loeliger < > j...@netgate.com> > *Cc: *vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> >

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

: "John Lo (loj)" <l...@cisco.com> Date: Wednesday, 7 February 2018 at 15:34 To: "Neale Ranns (nranns)" <nra...@cisco.com>, Jon Loeliger <j...@netgate.com> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: RE: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names I guess Jon’s poin

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

oj) <l...@cisco.com> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names Hi Jon, I feel I must ask ☺ “That has to match a VPP interface by name. But what name?” why does it need to match a VPP interface name? shouldn’t = MyVxlan23. Your control plane

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

behalf of Jon Loeliger <j...@netgate.com> Date: Friday, 2 February 2018 at 22:08 To: "John Lo (loj)" <l...@cisco.com> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 6:41 PM, John Lo (loj) <l...@cisco.com<ma

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

John, On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 2:14 PM, John Lo (loj) wrote: > Thanks Jon. Seems we have an agreed upon an approach now. Just to be > sure, let me list the specifics: > > > > 1. We will get rid of custom_instance_by_real_instance vector in > vxlan_main_t > See #3 below. >

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

will submit my GRE patch for review sometime later and add you as one of the reviewers. Thanks, John From: Jon Loeliger [mailto:j...@netgate.com] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 2:26 PM To: John Lo (loj) <l...@cisco.com> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tun

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 11:48 AM, John Lo (loj) wrote: > One more thang, I would prefer to have a u32 instance number instead of > the 64 bytes if_name in the vxlan_tunnel_details API. -John > Hi John, I'll work up a patch re-spin using a hash-table, and I will include the

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

t;j...@netgate.com> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names Hi Jon, I think a good approach would be to store the insurance number in the tunnel struct and use a hash table to track instance number usage. This is a more effective way to not waste

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

Jon Loeliger [mailto:j...@netgate.com] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 11:49 AM To: John Lo (loj) <l...@cisco.com> Cc: Dave Barach (dbarach) <dbar...@cisco.com>; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 9:55 AM, Jon Loelig

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 9:55 AM, Jon Loeliger wrote: > > > >> I think we must check and reject instance misuse for this to be >> acceptable. I doubt the renumber is really used much for vhost and tap >> interface (others please correct me if not true). >> > > We do use them on

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 9:29 AM, John Lo (loj) wrote: > Hi Jon, > Hi John, > I don’t think the renumber scheme, as used by vhost and tap interfaces, is > foolproof and can cause problems if used extensively for vxlan. On > creating an interface with renumber, it does not check

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

arach) <dbar...@cisco.com> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 6:41 PM, John Lo (loj) <l...@cisco.com<mailto:l...@cisco.com>> wrote: Hi Jon, All VPP tunnel creation uses the mechanism of returning a sw_if_in

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 6:41 PM, John Lo (loj) wrote: > Hi Jon, > > > > All VPP tunnel creation uses the mechanism of returning a sw_if_index of > the created tunnel. The name of the tunnel is then followed by a number > being the instance or index to the tunnel struct vector.

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

.fd.io] On > Behalf Of John Lo (loj) > Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 10:40 PM > To: Jon Loeliger <j...@netgate.com> > Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> > Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names > > Hi Jon, > > > > You can easily run just vxlan tests by

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

, 2018 4:18 PM To: John Lo (loj) <l...@cisco.com> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Jon Loeliger <j...@netgate.com<mailto:j...@netgate.com>> wrote: I have submitted a patch to Gerrit. When this p

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Jon Loeliger wrote: > > I have submitted a patch to Gerrit. When this passes "verify", I'll add > you to be > a Reviewer! > John, How do I run just these tests locally? I need to determine if these failures are due to my patch or not.

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 6:41 PM, John Lo (loj) wrote: > Hi Jon, > Hi John, Thanks for taking the time to get back to me on this! All VPP tunnel creation uses the mechanism of returning a sw_if_index of > the created tunnel. > I know. I get that. It works. > The name of

Re: [vpp-dev] VXLAN Tunnel IF Names

Hi Jon, All VPP tunnel creation uses the mechanism of returning a sw_if_index of the created tunnel. The name of the tunnel is then followed by a number being the instance or index to the tunnel struct vector. Thus, the first VXLAN tunnel created is called vxlan_tunnel0 followed by