[ovs-discuss] mf_value and mf_subvalue size restrictions

Madhu Challa challa at noironetworks.com
Thu Nov 6 19:03:19 UTC 2014

On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 10:08:00AM -0800, Madhu Challa wrote:
> > > One issue that comes up when doing this is that the TLVs in both
> > > Geneve and OXM are exactly the same size so mapping them directly
> > > would consume the entire OXM space just for Geneve. There was a
> > > suggestion to use experimenter OXMs since they are larger but I
> > > haven't had a chance to look into this yet.
> >
> > Yep I am using experimenter OXMs.
> At least then I won't feel like I wasted a lot of the time that went
> into implementing them.

I was happy to see that you added support for experimenter OXMs. I am sure
we will find many more uses for it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/attachments/20141106/3b7e1475/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list