[ovs-discuss] Re : Re : Re : Re : OvS 1.0.0 Compile error on fedora 13

DarkBls darkbls at yahoo.com
Wed May 26 06:59:25 UTC 2010


With a bit more thinking, since we have a centralized configuration database, there is no benefit to have the feature of switch stacking over a cascading. But we need the spanning tree to be able to make a redudant topology.




________________________________
De : Jesse Gross <jesse at nicira.com>
À : DarkBls <darkbls at yahoo.com>
Cc : Justin Pettit <jpettit at nicira.com>; discuss at openvswitch.org
Envoyé le : Mer 26 mai 2010, 1h 13min 59s
Objet : Re: [ovs-discuss] Re : Re : Re : OvS 1.0.0 Compile error on fedora 13


On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:24 AM, DarkBls <darkbls at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>4) OvS with GRE
>
>>OvS deployed on each server (blade) and connected to a distant configuration DB. Each OvS "switch" are cascading to antoher one through Gre Tunnel.
>
>>PRO:
>
>>Nothing to do on hardware in case of adding / removing virtual platform.
>>Can migrate a full switch with VM on another server without doing reconfiguration if the IP used for GRE doesn't change
>
>>CONS:
>
>>Cascading and no stacking. Beware of loop (since there is no STP on OvS) and single point of failure in topology
>>Scalability / performance ?
>>Would have prefered GRE stack instead of cascading to be able to construct one (or several) virtual switches through hardware.
>

Can you explain this last sentence a bit more?  I think the abstraction of a GRE virtual port is fairly common, so I'm not sure how it differs from what you were expecting/would prefer.


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/attachments/20100526/b7be3c4c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the discuss mailing list