[ovs-dev] [PATCH v7 1/2] ovn: Avoid ARP responder for packets from localnet port

[Han Zhou]

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Russell Bryant <russell at ovn.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Han Zhou <zhouhan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This is required by next commit that allows lswitch with localnet
>> port to be attached to multiple chassises. Without this patch, if
>> an ARP request comes from localnet port, on each chassis there will
>> be an ARP response, which is not desired.
>>
>> An new stage ls_in_arp_rsp is introduced for ARP responder before
>> ls_in_l2_lkup.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Russell Bryant <russell at ovn.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Han Zhou <zhouhan at gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  ovn/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>  ovn/northd/ovn-northd.c     | 40
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>  2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/ovn/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml b/ovn/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
>> index 1b2912e..cacd760 100644
>> --- a/ovn/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
>> +++ b/ovn/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
>> @@ -195,17 +195,22 @@
>>        </li>
>>      </ul>
>>
>> -    <h3>Ingress Table 3: Destination Lookup</h3>
>> +    <h3>Ingress Table 3: ARP responder</h3>
>>
>
> Thanks for the quick fix!
>
>  Moving this into its own table seems fine to me.  I don't think it's
required,  right?  It does at least seem easier to understand.

To match something (localnet here) to skip ARP responder but continue with
l2_lkup flows, a new table seems to be the only way (at least the right
way) to do it. And yes, it is more clear.

>
> Would we eventually add the equivalent for IPv6 neighbor discovery to the
same table?  If so, should we call it something else?  That can always be
changed later when we add more to it, though.
>

Good point! Yes, we could change the name if needed.

> Acked-by: Russell Bryant <russell at ovn.org>

Thanks for the review!


--
Best regards,
Han