[ovs-dev] [PATCH v2] ipfix: Add ingress and egress interface in exporting flows

[Ben Pfaff]

The odp_ports aren't meaningful at all outside of OVS, so they're almost
worthless.  How do you intend for the receiver to interpret them?

If the IPFIX record doesn't otherwise say what bridge the ofp_ports
correspond to, then I suggest adding some way to identify the bridge;
for example, you could use the bridge's name, as a string, or its
OpenFlow datapath_id (a 64-bit integer).

On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 11:35:14PM +0000, Daniel Ye wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> 
> Thanks for review. In my opinion, the ofp_port may be the same on different bridge. If so, we still don’t differentiate the flows
> in this scenario. That’s why I choose to use odd_port.
> 
> Bests,
> Daniel
> > On Jul 5, 2016, at 5:22 AM, Ben Pfaff <blp at ovn.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 08:48:43PM -0700, Daniel Benli Ye wrote:
> >> In virtual evironment, IPFIX is unable to differentiate flows
> >> between pair of VMs on different virtual network if their IP/mac
> >> are same.
> >> 
> >> Network:
> >>    VM1 <---- VNI1 ----> VM3
> >>    VM2 <---- VNI2 ----> VM4
> >> 
> >>    In terms of IP/mac:
> >>        VM1 == VM2
> >>        VM3 == VM4
> >> 
> >> Send 10 packets each from VM1 - VM3 and VM2 - VM4
> >> Expectation:
> >> - Normal IPFIX record for 10 packets from VM1-VM3
> >> - Tunnel IPFIX record for 10 packets from VM1-VM3
> >> - Normal IPFIX record for 10 packets from VM2-VM4
> >> - Tunnel IPFIX record for 10 packets from VM2-VM4
> >> What really is:
> >> - Normal IPFIX record for 20 packets from VM1-VM3 (or VM2-VM4)
> >> - Tunnel IPFIX record for 10 packets from VM1-VM3
> >> - Tunnel IPFIX record for 10 packets from VM2-VM4
> >> IPFIX is unable to differentiate that VM1-VM3 and VM2-VM4 are actually
> >> 2 different flows for normal record.
> >> 
> >> Add ingress and egress interface which are the odp_port in the OVS
> >> bridge to differentiate the flows above. Use IPFIX Information Element
> >> identifiers "ingressInterface" and "egressInterface" in rfc5102 to
> >> carry the information.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Benli Ye <daniely at vmware.com>
> >> 
> >> ---
> >> v1 -> v2:
> >> - Use 32bit odp_port instead of ofp_port.
> >> - Fix some "sparse" warnings.
> > 
> > I don't understand why this switches from ofp_port to odp_port.  The ODP
> > port numbers are not part of the Open vSwitch external interface; they
> > are only an implementation detail.
>