[vpp-dev] nat64 local ping problem

2018-01-10 Thread Juan Salmon 
Hi,

Does nat64 support local ping? It's failed in my test.

Best Regards,
Juan Salmon.
___
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev

[vpp-dev] VPP 18.01 Release Milestone RC2 is complete!

2018-01-10 Thread Dave Wallace 

Folks,

I have created the v18.01-rc2 tag on stable/1801 and verified that 
18.01-rc2 build artifacts have been uploaded to nexus.fd.io.  VPP 18.01 
Release Milestone RC2 is complete!


As a reminder, the VPP 18.01 Release is in two weeks on Wednesday 
January 24, 2018.


https://wiki.fd.io/view/Projects/vpp/Release_Plans/Release_Plan_18.01#Release_Milestones

The CSIT team has pulled the CSIT 18.01 release branch (rls1801) and 
will be kicking off a dry-run of formal tests tomorrow.  Once the 
dry-runs are complete, the official release testing will begin which 
will generate all of the test and performance data to be released in the 
CSIT 18.01 Release Report on January 31, 2018:


https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/csit1801_plan#Release_Milestones

It is important that only bugs which address critical issues (as 
determined by the VPP committers), ideally limited to addressing bugs 
found by CSIT testing.


Per the standard process, all bug fixes to stable branches should follow 
the best practices:


 * All bug fixes must be double-committed to the release throttle as
   well as to the master branch
 o Commit first to the release throttle, then "git cherry-pick"
   into master
 o Manual merges may be required, depending on the degree of
   divergence between throttle and master
 * All bug fixes need to have a Jira ticket
 o Please put Jira IDs into the commit messages.
 o Please use the same Jira ID for both the stable branch and master.

Thanks,
-daw-
___
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev

Re: [vpp-dev] question about load balance

2018-01-10 Thread Neale Ranns (nranns) 

You could also try adjusting in vnet/dpo/load_balance.c:

/*
* distribution error tolerance for load-balancing
*/
const f64 multipath_next_hop_error_tolerance = 0.1;

to a lower values, until it meets your needs.
Note this value is not exposed to the CLI/API for adjustment.

/neale

From: "Pierre Pfister (ppfister)" 
Date: Wednesday, 10 January 2018 at 10:39
To: 薛欣颖 
Cc: "Neale Ranns (nranns)" , vpp-dev 
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] question about load balance

Hello,

You will not be able to get an exact match on 1/3 - 2/3 traffic sharing since 3 
is not a power of two.
If you want to get something closer, you may try to increase the values to get 
a better approximation.

For instance, 43 and 85 have a sum of 128 with 43/128 = 0.3359375, which is 
close to the 0.3 you are looking for.

- Pierre



Le 10 janv. 2018 à 07:36, 薛欣颖 > 
a écrit :


Hi Neale,

I know what you mean.
What should I do to match exactly I configured?  And ignore constraints 'a 
load-balance is always a power of 2'.

Thanks,
Xyxue

From: Neale Ranns (nranns)
Date: 2018-01-09 20:58
To: 薛欣颖; vpp-dev
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] question about load balance
Hi Xyxue,

It does match your configuration. You requested a 2:1 ratio un-equal cost load 
balancing, you got a 5:3, which VPP considers to be close enough. It’s not 
exact because the number of buckets in a load-balance is always a power of 2.

/neale

From: > on 
behalf of 薛欣颖 >
Date: Tuesday, 9 January 2018 at 12:26
To: vpp-dev >
Subject: [vpp-dev] question about load balance


Hi guys,

I'm testing routing load balance. There is a question : When I configured 1:2 , 
the actual effect 3:5. My configuration and more info is shown below:

configuration:
  ip route add 4.1.1.1/24 via ip4-address 1.1.1.2 interface host-eth0 weight 1
  ip route add 4.1.1.1/24 via ip4-address 2.1.1.2 interface host-eth4 weight 2

The actual effect:
4.1.1.0/24
  unicast-ip4-chain
  [@0]: dpo-load-balance: [proto:ip4 index:22 buckets:8 uRPF:29 to:[0:0]]
[0] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[1] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[2] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[3] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[4] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[5] [@5]: ipv4 via 1.1.1.2 host-eth0: 000c296db078fc4dd4dad8af0800
[6] [@5]: ipv4 via 1.1.1.2 host-eth0: 000c296db078fc4dd4dad8af0800
[7] [@5]: ipv4 via 1.1.1.2 host-eth0: 000c296db078fc4dd4dad8af0800

How can I make  the actual effect the  same as my configuration?

Thanks,
Xyxue

___
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev

___
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev

Re: [vpp-dev] question about load balance

2018-01-10 Thread Pierre Pfister (ppfister) 
Hello,

You will not be able to get an exact match on 1/3 - 2/3 traffic sharing since 3 
is not a power of two.
If you want to get something closer, you may try to increase the values to get 
a better approximation.

For instance, 43 and 85 have a sum of 128 with 43/128 = 0.3359375, which is 
close to the 0.3 you are looking for.

- Pierre


Le 10 janv. 2018 à 07:36, 薛欣颖 > 
a écrit :


Hi Neale,

I know what you mean.
What should I do to match exactly I configured?  And ignore constraints 'a 
load-balance is always a power of 2'.

Thanks,
Xyxue

From: Neale Ranns (nranns)
Date: 2018-01-09 20:58
To: 薛欣颖; vpp-dev
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] question about load balance
Hi Xyxue,

It does match your configuration. You requested a 2:1 ratio un-equal cost load 
balancing, you got a 5:3, which VPP considers to be close enough. It’s not 
exact because the number of buckets in a load-balance is always a power of 2.

/neale

From: > on 
behalf of 薛欣颖 >
Date: Tuesday, 9 January 2018 at 12:26
To: vpp-dev >
Subject: [vpp-dev] question about load balance


Hi guys,

I'm testing routing load balance. There is a question : When I configured 1:2 , 
the actual effect 3:5. My configuration and more info is shown below:

configuration:
  ip route add 4.1.1.1/24 via ip4-address 1.1.1.2 interface host-eth0 weight 1
  ip route add 4.1.1.1/24 via ip4-address 2.1.1.2 interface host-eth4 weight 2

The actual effect:
4.1.1.0/24
  unicast-ip4-chain
  [@0]: dpo-load-balance: [proto:ip4 index:22 buckets:8 uRPF:29 to:[0:0]]
[0] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[1] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[2] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[3] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[4] [@5]: ipv4 via 2.1.1.2 host-eth4: 000c296db08c2c534a0393540800
[5] [@5]: ipv4 via 1.1.1.2 host-eth0: 000c296db078fc4dd4dad8af0800
[6] [@5]: ipv4 via 1.1.1.2 host-eth0: 000c296db078fc4dd4dad8af0800
[7] [@5]: ipv4 via 1.1.1.2 host-eth0: 000c296db078fc4dd4dad8af0800

How can I make  the actual effect the  same as my configuration?

Thanks,
Xyxue

___
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev

___
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev