[ovs-dev] [PATCH] ofp-util: Support OFPP_LOCAL in enqueue actions.

Ben Pfaff blp at nicira.com
Sat Nov 19 18:29:06 UTC 2011


DESIGN is OK too, at least for now.

All the port terminology is changing in OpenFlow 1.2 anyway.  This might
be fixed, I don't know.

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 10:20:49AM -0800, Justin Pettit wrote:
> Do you think we should put that in DESIGN?  Also, we should start
> chipping away at ambiguities in the OpenFlow spec by filing spec bugs
> in the ONF bug tracker.  I've been trying to do that with areas that I
> see.
> 
> --Justin
> 
> 
> On Nov 18, 2011, at 8:36 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> 
> > OK, that's good enough for me.
> > 
> > I've been thinking of creating a section in the ovs-vswitchd manpage
> > that describes Open vSwitch interpretations of the OpenFlow text, in
> > places where it's not entirely clear.  Would you mind starting it out,
> > by adding a sentence or so that mentions our interpretation of
> > OFPP_LOCAL as a physical port?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Ben.
> > 
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 08:07:17PM -0800, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> >> I suppose it depends on how you interpret the term physical port.  It
> >> certainly isn't a nic, but it does have a linux device which I assume
> >> you can attach linux QoS to.  In that sense, it is more of a physical
> >> port then OFPP_NONE, or OFPP_FLOOD.
> >> 
> >> I don't think we should take a strict interpretation of "physical
> >> port" because it would be difficult to enforce.  Any number of the
> >> ports in the range [1, 1024] may not be physical (tap devices, vifs,
> >> tunnels, internal ports, etc).  The current code allows these but
> >> doesn't allow OFPP_LOCAL which feels inconsistent to me.
> >> 
> >> Ethan
> >> 
> >> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 19:43, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 07:03:38PM -0800, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> >>>> According to the specification the enqueue action should refer to
> >>>> "a valid physical port", or OFPP_IN_PORT. ?It would be strange to
> >>>> attach a queueing discipline to the local port, but I see no reason
> >>>> to restrict it.
> >>> 
> >>> Is OFPP_LOCAL a physical port?
> >>> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > dev mailing list
> > dev at openvswitch.org
> > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
> 



More information about the dev mailing list