It works for me now with the latest patch. Thanks. It sounds like Qipeng
has a routing issue, DNS issue, or proxy issue.

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:44 PM Qipeng Song <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Jaime,
>
> Thanks for this new patchset. With these new updates, I found that once
> the VM is created by Vagrant file, my VM cannot do `sudo apt-get update`!
>
> *0% [Working]*
> *Err:1 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu
> <http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu> xenial InRelease*
> *  Temporary failure resolving 'us.archive.ubuntu.com
> <http://us.archive.ubuntu.com>'*
> *Err:2 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu
> <http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu> xenial-security InRelease*
> *  Temporary failure resolving 'security.ubuntu.com
> <http://security.ubuntu.com>'*
>
> This process is always stuck at this 0% and finally throw out an error
> message…
>
> I tried to use another vm box in Vagrant file
>
> *config.vm.box = "bento/ubuntu-16.04”*
>
> This time, there is no ` apt-get update` related problem, however, the
> execution of this demo is still failed… because I finally found the
> container
> `classifier1` is not created! All other containers are there… really
> surprising.
>
> Thus, could you tell me your Vagrant version and virtualbox version? Mine
> is Vagrant 2.2.4 and Virtualbox 5.1.38, and my linux kernel
> is .15.0-43-generic. By the way, besides VM box "generic/ubuntu1604”, do
> you have any other recommandation?
>
> BR,
> Qipeng
>
> On 29 Mar 2019, at 13:27, Jaime Caamaño Ruiz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I just tried out myself. I rebased the patch [1] on master and added a
> few fixes but nothing that strikes me as the problem that both of you
> are having. One of the fixes includes a new dependency for the OVS 2.11
> kernel module that prevents it to be correctly installed but the
> consequence was rather evident.
>
> For me the connectivity test works even though you notice that it is
> very slow because of the retransmissions due to the checksum problem.
>
> Could you try again with the new patchset?
>
> [1] https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/79533/
>
> BR
> Jaime.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Lester <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Brady Johnson <[email protected]>, Qipeng Song <qpsong@gm
> ail.com>, sfc-dev opendaylight <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [sfc-dev] Problems related to sfc103 demo
> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 16:27:41 -0400
>
> I still observe the packets not being egressed out the classifier with
> Brady's patch. And in the OVS logs, I still see the Invalid argument
> warning. I am using OVS 2.11.90 and Linux 4.4.0 (SFC-Demo 103). The
> flow rule is shown below. Did the patch work for you? I'm not sure the
> out of order actions are the problem?
>
> cookie=0x0, duration=7464.231s, table=0, n_packets=45, n_bytes=3330,
> priority=1000,tcp,in_port="veth-
> br",nw_src=192.168.2.0/24,nw_dst=192.168.2.0/24,tp_dst=80
> actions=encap(nsh),set_field:0x38/0xffffff->nsh_spi,set_field:255-
>
> nsh_si,set_field:0x1->nsh_c1,set_field:0x2->nsh_c2,set_field:0x3-
> nsh_c3,set_field:0x4->nsh_c4,encap(ethernet),load:0xc0a80114-
> NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],output:"sff0-dpl"
>
>
> Thanks,
> JD
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 11:15 AM Jaime Caamaño Ruiz <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Hello Qipeng
>
> 2019-02-25T16:23:54.162Z|00037|dpif_netlink|WARN|Failed to create
> sff0-
> dpl with rtnetlink: Invalid argument
>
>
> I havent observed this on my side. Could this be related with the
> development OVS version you are running? Did you make sure you are
> running an OVS kernel module that is not too old?
>
> For the message,
> `push_eth(src=00:00:00:00:00:00,dst=00:00:00:00:00:00)`, I don’t
> know
> whether it really matters, because when I search with this sentence
> with google, I do find some posts containing such a message.
>
>
> That should not be a problem. The "Invalid Argument" issue was due to
> writing openflow actions out of order. The fix is included in Brady's
> patch.
>
> We did trace back to an issue in OVS where it does not output correct
> tcp checksums when combined with nsh encapsulation. More info @ [1].
> I
> suggest that you reproduce the issue and to follow up [1] with your
> own
> info to check if we could get some more traction there.
>
> More info:
>
> [1] https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/2018-June/0469
> 03.html
>
> BR
> Jaime.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Qipeng Song <[email protected]>
> To: Brady Johnson <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> Cc: sfc-dev opendaylight <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [sfc-dev] Problems related to sfc103 demo
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:42:02 +0100
>
> Dear Brady,
>
> I would like to pick up on this problem again after almost one month.
> I
> noticed that you have submitted a third patch related to this demo. I
> tried. It seems that the problem we discussed is still there.
>
> I agree with you that classifier1 in this demo does not egress any
> packet. I tried to tcpdump `veth-br0` and I do observe the http
> traffic
> sent from `veth-app` device.
>
> In addition, I check the content of /var/log/openvswitch/ovs-
> vswitchd.log. I find one entry what I think maybe helpful for debug
> this problem:
>
> 2019-02-25T16:23:54.162Z|00037|dpif_netlink|WARN|Failed to create
> sff0-
> dpl with rtnetlink: Invalid argument
>
> According to the output of command `ovs-vsctl show`:
>
> root@classifier1:/# ovs-vsctl show
> c4da2445-7a71-4eb5-b4f8-16894a5228dd
>    Manager "tcp:192.168.1.5:6640"
>        is_connected: true
>    Bridge br-sfc
>        Controller "tcp:192.168.1.5:6653"
>            is_connected: true
>        Port "sff0-dpl"
>            Interface "sff0-dpl"
>                type: vxlan
>                options: {dst_port="6633", exts=gpe, remote_ip=flow}
>        Port br-sfc
>            Interface br-sfc
>                type: internal
>        Port veth-br
>            Interface veth-br
>    ovs_version: "2.11.90"
>
> Port sff0-dpl is important to forward packet to sff in a service
> function chain.
>
> For the message,
> `push_eth(src=00:00:00:00:00:00,dst=00:00:00:00:00:00)`, I don’t
> know
> whether it really matters, because when I search with this sentence
> with google, I do find some posts containing such a message.
>
> Thus, I doubt that perhaps the cause of this problem is, due to
> somewhat invalide arguement during creation of sff0-dpl, the packet
> that forwarded from `veth-br`to `sff0-dpl` cannot be correctly
> processed?
>
> Hope to see your feedback.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Qipeng
>
> On 21 Jan 2019, at 16:15, Brady Johnson <[email protected]
>
> m>
>
> wrote:
>
> Qipeng,
>
> I get this same problem.
>
> Those ODL errors dont really matter. Remember, once the flows are
> written to the OVS bridges, errors in ODL shouldnt affect traffic.
>
> With the help of Manuel Buil from OPNFV SFC, we were able to
> determine that OVS on the classifier is not egressing any packets.
>
> I
>
> tried doing a tcpdump on every interface in classifier1, and didnt
> get anything. I then saw some errors in /var/log/openvswitch/ovs-
> vswitchd.log that helped me figure out the problem. First it was
> complaining about some invalid arguments set on the VXLAN tunnel in
> OVS, as follows:
>
> 2019-01-21T14:01:04.692Z|00105|dpif(handler7)|WARN|system@ovs-sy
>
> st
>
> em: failed to put[create] (Invalid argument) ufid:75d78d13-c972-
> 4f50-ac66-d0a6668e8b7c rec
>
> irc_id(0),dp_hash(0/0),skb_priority(0/0),in_port(2),skb_mark(0/0),
>
>
> ct_state(0/0),ct_zone(0/0),ct_mark(0/0),ct_label(0/0),eth(src=00:00
>
> :11:11:11:11,dst=00:00:
>
> 22:22:22:22),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=192.168.2.1/255.255.255.0,d
>
>
> st=192.168.2.2/255.255.255.0,proto=6,tos=0/0,ttl=64/0,frag=no),tcp(
>
> src=51636/0,dst=80),tcp
> _flags(0/0),
>
> actions:push_nsh(flags=0,ttl=63,mdtype=1,np=3,spi=0x0,si=255,c1=0x0
>
>
> ,c2=0x0,c3=0x0,c4=0x0),set(tunnel(tun_id=0x0,dst=192.168.1.20,ttl=6
>
> 4,tp_dst=
>
> 6633,flags(df|key))),push_eth(src=00:00:00:00:00:00,dst=00:00:00:0
>
> 0:00:00),set(nsh(spi=0x4e,si=255,c1=0x1,c2=0x2,c3=0x3,c4=0x4)),3
> 2019-01-21T14:01:04.692Z|00106|dpif(handler7)|WARN|system@ovs-sy
>
> st
>
> em: execute
>
> push_nsh(flags=0,ttl=63,mdtype=1,np=3,spi=0x0,si=255,c1=0x0,c2=0x0,
>
> c3=0x0,c4=0
>
> x0),set(tunnel(tun_id=0x0,dst=192.168.1.20,ttl=64,tp_dst=6633,flag
>
>
> s(df|key))),push_eth(src=00:00:00:00:00:00,dst=00:00:00:00:00:00),s
>
> et(nsh(spi=0x4e,si=255,
> c1=0x1,c2=0x2,c3=0x3,c4=0x4)),3 failed (Invalid argument) on
> packet
>
> tcp,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:00:11:11:11:11,dl_dst=00:00:22:22:22:
>
> 22,nw_src=192.168.2.1
>
> ,nw_dst=192.168.2.2,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=64,tp_src=51636,tp_ds
>
> t=80,tcp_flags=syn tcp_csum:e44
>  with metadata skb_priority(0),skb_mark(0),in_port(2) mtu 0
> 2019-01-21T14:02:06.181Z|00081|netdev_vport|WARN|sff0-dpl:
>
> unknown
>
> vxlan argument 'nsp'
> sff0-dpl: unknown vxlan argument 'nshc2'
> sff0-dpl: unknown vxlan argument 'nshc3'
> sff0-dpl: unknown vxlan argument 'nshc4'
> sff0-dpl: unknown vxlan argument 'nsi'
> sff0-dpl: unknown vxlan argument 'nshc1'
>
>
> I removed those from the tunnel creation in setup_sfc.py but still
> had similar problems, as follows:
>
> 2019-01-21T14:44:32.795Z|00013|dpif(handler7)|WARN|system@ovs-sys
>
> te
>
> m: failed to put[create] (Invalid argument) ufid:e316ee8c-30b1-
> 4f7b-83ce-94cf9a029cab rec
>
> irc_id(0),dp_hash(0/0),skb_priority(0/0),in_port(2),skb_mark(0/0),c
>
>
> t_state(0/0),ct_zone(0/0),ct_mark(0/0),ct_label(0/0),eth(src=00:00:
>
> 11:11:11:11,dst=00:00:
>
> 22:22:22:22),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=192.168.2.1/255.255.255.0,ds
>
>
> t=192.168.2.2/255.255.255.0,proto=6,tos=0/0,ttl=64/0,frag=no),tcp(s
>
> rc=39382/0,dst=80),tcp
> _flags(0/0),
>
> actions:push_nsh(flags=0,ttl=63,mdtype=1,np=3,spi=0x0,si=255,c1=0x0
>
>
> ,c2=0x0,c3=0x0,c4=0x0),set(tunnel(tun_id=0x0,dst=192.168.1.20,ttl=6
>
> 4,tp_dst=
>
> 6633,flags(df|key))),push_eth(src=00:00:00:00:00:00,dst=00:00:00:00
>
> :00:00),set(nsh(spi=0x21,si=255,c1=0x1,c2=0x2,c3=0x3,c4=0x4)),3
> 2019-01-21T14:44:32.795Z|00014|dpif(handler7)|WARN|system@ovs-sys
>
> te
>
> m: execute
>
> push_nsh(flags=0,ttl=63,mdtype=1,np=3,spi=0x0,si=255,c1=0x0,c2=0x0,
>
> c3=0x0,c4=0
>
> x0),set(tunnel(tun_id=0x0,dst=192.168.1.20,ttl=64,tp_dst=6633,flags
>
>
> (df|key))),push_eth(src=00:00:00:00:00:00,dst=00:00:00:00:00:00),se
>
> t(nsh(spi=0x21,si=255,
> c1=0x1,c2=0x2,c3=0x3,c4=0x4)),3 failed (Invalid argument) on
>
> packet
>
>
> tcp,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:00:11:11:11:11,dl_dst=00:00:22:22:22:
>
> 22,nw_src=192.168.2.1
>
> ,nw_dst=192.168.2.2,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=64,tp_src=39382,tp_dst
>
> =80,tcp_flags=syn tcp_csum:a04f
> with metadata skb_priority(0),skb_mark(0),in_port(2) mtu 0
>
>
> This is the only flow in classifier1 that's matching, so it has to
>
> be
>
> the one causing these problems:
>
> cookie=0x0, duration=246.179s, table=0, n_packets=10,
>
> n_bytes=740,
>
> priority=1000,tcp,in_port="veth-
> br",nw_src=192.168.2.0/24,nw_dst=192.168.2.0/24,tp_dst=80
> actions=encap(nsh),encap(ethernet),set_field:0x4e/0xffffff-
>
> nsh_spi,set_field:255->nsh_si,set_field:0x1-
>
> nsh_c1,set_field:0x2-
>
> nsh_c2,set_field:0x3->nsh_c3,set_field:0x4-
> nsh_c4,load:0xc0a80114->NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],output:"sff0-dpl"
>
>
> I then compared that flow to how it works in OPNFV SFC, and
>
> realized
>
> we are pushing an ethernet header, but never set the ethernet
> addresses. Notice this from the above log message:
> push_eth(src=00:00:00:00:00:00,dst=00:00:00:00:00:00). Even though
> OVS doesnt say exactly what the invalid argument is, this must be
>
> the
>
> problem.
>
> I'll work on having the SFC classifier set the mac addresses
> accordingly.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brady
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 7:22 PM Qipeng Song <[email protected]>
>
> wrote:
>
> Hi, Brady.
>
> Thanks for your fix. Thanks to this fixt, the error related to
>
> ODL
>
> API RSP created is resolved.
>
> However, when I clean all (i.e. vagrant destroy -f) and restart
> sfc103(i.e. demo.sh), classifier1 still cannot manage to executes
> command <wget> to communicate with classfier2. I use ODL Fluorine
>
> +
>
> OVS 2.10.
>
> Before asking for your and the community’s help, I try to figure
> out myself. I first check the logfile of ODL (i.e.
> path/to/karaf_log/karaf.log) and filter the contents with
>
> “ERROR”:
>
>
>
> 2019-01-17T15:52:47,150 | ERROR | opendaylight-cluster-data-
> akka.actor.default-dispatcher-3 |
>
> DOMEntityOwnershipListenerAdapter
>
> | 294 - org.opendaylight.mdsal.eos-binding-adapter - 3.0.4 |
>
> Error
>
> converting DOM entity ID
> /(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:general-
> entity?revision=2015-09-
>
> 30)entity/entity[{(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:g
>
> eneral-entity?revision=2015-09-30)name=ofp-topology-manager}] to
> binding InstanceIdentifier
> java.lang.NullPointerException: null
> 2019-01-17T15:56:13,804 | ERROR | opendaylight-cluster-data-
> akka.actor.default-dispatcher-2 |
>
> DOMEntityOwnershipListenerAdapter
>
> | 294 - org.opendaylight.mdsal.eos-binding-adapter - 3.0.4 |
>
> Error
>
> converting DOM entity ID
> /(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:general-
> entity?revision=2015-09-
>
> 30)entity/entity[{(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:g
>
> eneral-entity?revision=2015-09-30)name=openflow:169900783159372}]
> to binding InstanceIdentifier
> java.lang.NullPointerException: null
> 2019-01-17T15:56:13,825 | ERROR | opendaylight-cluster-data-
> akka.actor.default-dispatcher-6 |
>
> DOMEntityOwnershipListenerAdapter
>
> | 294 - org.opendaylight.mdsal.eos-binding-adapter - 3.0.4 |
>
> Error
>
> converting DOM entity ID
> /(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:general-
> entity?revision=2015-09-
>
> 30)entity/entity[{(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:g
>
> eneral-entity?revision=2015-09-30)name=openflow:161082929448001}]
> to binding InstanceIdentifier
> java.lang.NullPointerException: null
> 2019-01-17T15:56:13,828 | ERROR | opendaylight-cluster-data-
> akka.actor.default-dispatcher-4 |
>
> DOMEntityOwnershipListenerAdapter
>
> | 294 - org.opendaylight.mdsal.eos-binding-adapter - 3.0.4 |
>
> Error
>
> converting DOM entity ID
> /(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:general-
> entity?revision=2015-09-
>
> 30)entity/entity[{(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:g
>
> eneral-entity?revision=2015-09-30)name=openflow:257641316118598}]
> to binding InstanceIdentifier
> java.lang.NullPointerException: null
> 2019-01-17T15:56:13,832 | ERROR | opendaylight-cluster-data-
> akka.actor.default-dispatcher-4 |
>
> DOMEntityOwnershipListenerAdapter
>
> | 294 - org.opendaylight.mdsal.eos-binding-adapter - 3.0.4 |
>
> Error
>
> converting DOM entity ID
> /(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:general-
> entity?revision=2015-09-
>
> 30)entity/entity[{(urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:mdsal:core:g
>
> eneral-entity?revision=2015-09-30)name=openflow:196794075627855}]
> to binding InstanceIdentifier
>
> The whole log file is available at URL: https://www.dropbox.com/s
>
> /k
>
> h01oqwrbu0ao72/karaf.log?dl=0
>
> Then I check the dump flows of ‘classifier1’ with:  docker exec
>
> -it
>
> classifier1 ovs-ofctl dump-flows -OOpenflow13 br-sfc. The output:
>
> cookie=0x0, duration=8087.160s, table=0, n_packets=245,
> n_bytes=18130, priority=1000,tcp,in_port="veth-
> br",nw_src=192.168.2.0/24,nw_dst=192.168.2.0/24,tp_dst=80
> actions=encap(nsh),encap(ethernet),set_field:0xd/0xffffff-
>
> nsh_spi,set_field:255->nsh_si,set_field:0x1-
>
> nsh_c1,set_field:0x2-
>
> nsh_c2,set_field:0x3->nsh_c3,set_field:0x4-
> nsh_c4,load:0xc0a80114->NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],output:"sff0-dpl"
>
> cookie=0x0, duration=8087.154s, table=0, n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=1000,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x80000d,nsh_si=253
> actions=decap(),decap(),output:"veth-br"
> cookie=0x14, duration=8087.160s, table=0, n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=5 actions=goto_table:1
>
> Nothing special. 245 packets have been sent out. Then I tried to
> verify the dump flows of ’SFF1’, which should receive packets
>
> from
>
> ‘classifier1’. The dump flows of SFF1 are:
> vagrant@odl:~$ docker exec -it sff1 ovs-ofctl dump-flows
> -Oopenflow13 br-sfc
> cookie=0x0, duration=8356.847s, table=0, n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=1000,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x80000d,nsh_si=253
> actions=load:0xc0a8010a->NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],IN_PORT
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=0, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=5 actions=goto_table:1
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=1, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=250,packet_type=(1,0x894f)
> actions=encap(ethernet),goto_table:4
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=1, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=250,dl_type=0x894f actions=goto_table:4
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=1, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=5 actions=drop
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=2, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=5 actions=goto_table:3
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=3, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=5 actions=goto_table:4
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=4, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=550,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x5,nsh_si=255
> actions=load:0xc0a8011e->NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],goto_table:10
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=4, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=550,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0xd,nsh_si=254
> actions=load:0xc0a80132->NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],goto_table:10
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=4, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=550,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x800005,nsh_si=255
> actions=load:0xc0a8011e->NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],goto_table:10
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=4, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=550,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0xd,nsh_si=255
> actions=load:0xc0a8011e->NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],goto_table:10
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=4, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=550,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x80000d,nsh_si=254
> actions=load:0xc0a8011e->NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],goto_table:10
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=4, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=5 actions=goto_table:10
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000102, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=660,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_mdtype=1,nsh_spi=0x5,nsh_si=254,nsh
>
> _c1=0x0 actions=IN_PORT
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000102, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=660,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_mdtype=1,nsh_spi=0x800005,nsh_si=25
>
> 4,nsh_c1=0x0 actions=IN_PORT
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000102, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=660,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_mdtype=1,nsh_spi=0x80000d,nsh_si=25
>
> 3,nsh_c1=0x0 actions=IN_PORT
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000103, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0, priority=655,in_port="sff1-
> dpl",dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x5,nsh_si=254
> actions=move:NXOXM_NSH_C1[]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],move:NXOXM_NSH_C2[]-
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],IN_PORT
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0, priority=655,in_port="sff1-
> dpl",dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x5,nsh_si=255
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]->NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],IN_PORT
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0, priority=655,in_port="sff1-
> dpl",dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x800005,nsh_si=255
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]->NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],IN_PORT
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000103, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0, priority=655,in_port="sff1-
> dpl",dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x800005,nsh_si=254
> actions=move:NXOXM_NSH_C1[]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],move:NXOXM_NSH_C2[]-
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],IN_PORT
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0, priority=655,in_port="sff1-
> dpl",dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0xd,nsh_si=255
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]->NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],IN_PORT
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0, priority=655,in_port="sff1-
> dpl",dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0xd,nsh_si=254
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]->NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],IN_PORT
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0, priority=655,in_port="sff1-
> dpl",dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x80000d,nsh_si=254
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]->NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],IN_PORT
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000103, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0, priority=655,in_port="sff1-
> dpl",dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x80000d,nsh_si=253
> actions=move:NXOXM_NSH_C1[]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],move:NXOXM_NSH_C2[]-
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],IN_PORT
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=650,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x5,nsh_si=255
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],output:"sff1-dpl"
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=650,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x800005,nsh_si=255
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],output:"sff1-dpl"
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000103, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=650,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x5,nsh_si=254
> actions=move:NXOXM_NSH_C1[]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],move:NXOXM_NSH_C2[]-
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],output:"sff1-dpl"
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000103, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=650,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x800005,nsh_si=254
> actions=move:NXOXM_NSH_C1[]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],move:NXOXM_NSH_C2[]-
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],output:"sff1-dpl"
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=650,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0xd,nsh_si=254
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],output:"sff1-dpl"
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=650,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0xd,nsh_si=255
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],output:"sff1-dpl"
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000101, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=650,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x80000d,nsh_si=254
> actions=move:NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],output:"sff1-dpl"
>
> cookie=0xba5eba1100000103, duration=8366.192s, table=10,
> n_packets=0, n_bytes=0,
> priority=650,dl_type=0x894f,nsh_spi=0x80000d,nsh_si=253
> actions=move:NXOXM_NSH_C1[]-
>
> NXM_NX_TUN_IPV4_DST[],move:NXOXM_NSH_C2[]-
> NXM_NX_TUN_ID[0..31],output:"sff1-dpl"
>
> cookie=0x14, duration=8366.192s, table=10, n_packets=0,
>
> n_bytes=0,
>
> priority=5 actions=drop
>
> It is surprising to find that SFF1 receives 0 packets!!! I think
> this is caused by the JAVA error presented before.
>
> Since I’m new to ODL and SFC, thus I need your help. Do you have
> some answers for this or could you give me some blues to solve
>
> this
>
> problem?
>
> Thanks very much.
>
> BR,
> Qipeng
>
>
>
>
> On 15 Jan 2019, at 18:36, Brady Johnson <bradyallenjohnson@gmai
>
> l.
>
> com> wrote:
>
> Qipeng,
>
> The created-rendered-path API is indeed no longer supported.
>
> That
>
> API created the RSP (Rendered Service Path, which is the actual
> service chain), but now the RSP gets created when the SFP
> (Service Function Path) is created.
>
> I thought this was already fixed in the sfc103 demo, but
> apparently not :) I submit this patch to fix that and the
>
> number
>
> of features you reported earlier:
>
> https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/79533
>
> Regards,
>
> Brady
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 12:38 AM Qipeng Song <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone!
>
> Recently I’m working on sfc103 demo.However I’m still stuck
>
> by
>
> the following POST request failure:
>
> POST http://192.168.1.5:8181/restconf/operations/rendered-s
>
> er
>
> vice-path:create-rendered-path/
> {
>    "input": {
>        "name": "RSP2",
>        "parent-service-function-path": "SFP2",
>        "symmetric": "true"
>    }
> }
> {"errors":{"error":[{"error-type":"protocol","error-
> tag":"invalid-value","error-message":"URI has bad format.
> Possible reasons:\n 1. \"rendered-service-path:create-
> rendered-path\" was not found in parent data node.\n 2.
> \"rendered-service-path:create-rendered-path\" is behind
> mount point. Then it should be in format \"/yang-
> ext:mount/rendered-service-path:create-rendered-
>
> path\"."}]}}
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>  File "/sfc/sfc-demo/sfc103/update_sfc.py", line 160, in
> <module>
>    post(controller, DEFAULT_PORT,
> get_rendered_service_path_uri(),
> get_rendered_service_path_data(), True)
>  File "/sfc/sfc-demo/sfc103/update_sfc.py", line 44, in
>
> post
>
>    r.raise_for_status()
>  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-
>
> packages/requests/models.py",
>
> line 840, in raise_for_status
>    raise HTTPError(http_error_msg, response=self)
> requests.exceptions.HTTPError: 400 Client Error: Bad
>
> Request
>
> for url: http://192.168.1.5:8181/restconf/operations/render
>
> ed
>
> -service-path:create-rendered-path/
>
>
> I tried to find solutions in the mail archive. I found
> something related to my problem(I put it at the end of this
> mail). I want to know whether this API(created-rendered-path)
> is supported again in the latest ODL version? If no, do we
>
> have
>
> some workaround to solve this problem?
>
> Thanks very much.
>
> BR,
> Qipeng
>
> From: JaimeCaamaño Ruiz
> Date: 2018-11-20 22:27
> To: 喻晶洁
> CC: sfc-dev
> Subject: Re: OpenDaylight sfc-demo question
> Hello
>
> The demo is currently not working because it relies in an
>
> ODL
>
> API
>
> (create-rendered-path) that has been removed since
>
> fluorine.
>
> I will
>
> work on it in the following days to fix it.
>
> BR
> Jaime.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 喻晶洁  <yujingjie at fiberhome.com>
> To: jcaamano at suse.de
> Subject: OpenDaylight sfc-demo question
> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 20:10:27 +0800
>
> Hi, Dear Jaime,
> I am studying the Opendaylight/sfc project. When doing an
>
> experiment
>
> with sfc-demo/sfc103(https://github.com/opendaylight/sfc/tr
>
> ee
>
> /master/
>
> sf
> c-demo/sfc103), I have a problem as figure below. When I
>
> run
>
> the
>
> python
> file setup_sfc.py, the RestAPI error always occur.
> Could you give me some tips?
> Run setup_sfc.py and show:
>
> Run docker-compose and show:
>
> ODL:
>
>
>
> Thanks very much!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sfc-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sfc-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev
> _______________________________________________
> sfc-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
sfc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev

Reply via email to