[ovs-discuss] Getting OpenFlow Set Up

Henrique Rodrigues henriquesilvar at gmail.com
Mon Oct 18 17:06:02 UTC 2010


On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 08:44:14AM -0200, Henrique Rodrigues wrote:
> > Hi Justin
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Justin Pettit <jpettit at nicira.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Oct 17, 2010, at 5:28 PM, Derek Cormier wrote:
> > >
> > > > When you add ports to a virtual bridge, should you still be able to
> ping
> > > them? For some reason, I cannot ping the interface on the switch that a
> host
> > > connects to. Yet, I can ping another host.
> > >
> > > Do you mean, for example, if you add eth0 to br0, you can't ping the
> > > address assigned to eth0?  If so, then, no, you cannot ping the
> addresses of
> > > attached devices.
> >
> >
> > Why not? I also noticed that...
> >
> > As far as I know, after receiving a packet, the datapath will send a
> message
> > to the ovs-vswitchd stating that there is no rule matching that packet.
> Upon
> > receiving this "missed flow message", ovs-vswitchd can check if the paket
> > ip_dst matches one of its local interfaces' addresses and is able to
> answer
> > the question telling the datapath to send the packet to the running
> kernel
> > IP stack. Is there any rule prohibiting this behavior?
>
> It doesn't work because it's not the way Linux bridging works, it
> doesn't fit well into the Linux network stack, and we didn't see a
> good-enough reason to try to fight both of those precedents to implement
> it anyway.
>

Sorry, I just asked to check if there were a way to do that...

-- 
Henrique Rodrigues
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/attachments/20101018/a99178ef/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the discuss mailing list