On 2017/3/3 1:33, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 07:15:48PM +0800, Dong Jun wrote:
An router IP MUST be set to dhcp v4 option for option 3, but not all subnet
do have a gateway IP. Furthermore, if i set 0.0.0.0 to option as a
tradeoff, the VM can obtain client ip and a gateway
Thanks, get it.
On 2017/1/25 16:30, Mickey Spiegel wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:26 AM, Dong Jun <do...@dtdream.com
<mailto:do...@dtdream.com>> wrote:
Hi
I learned about the distributed dnat_and_snat. Now I don't see
what's the manner of sending GARP for
Hi
I learned about the distributed dnat_and_snat. Now I don't see
what's the manner of sending GARP for distributed dnat_and_snat IP. In
the past, we set nat_addresses column in lsp that connected to gateway
lrp. Now the type of lrp was changed from l3gateway to patch, does this
affect
On 2017/1/7 17:14, Dong Jun wrote:
I tested my
issue(https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2016-December/326936.html)
withpatch serial v3 1-4 (http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/712028/).
It sounds a little vague, i mean all four patches from 1/4 to 4/4.
The issue has been resolved
o work this way.
> It would be good to add these changes to the documentation as well.
My patch does update the documentation on this point.
​Thanks Ben for all the fixes. We are in middle of performance testing
with the version of ovn-controller which creates patch ports for
30, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Numan
Siddique <nusid...@redhat.com
<mailto:nusid...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Dong
Start devstack in one node(master code).
(10.0.0.7)vm --- (10.0.0.1)dr(169.254.128.2) ---
(169.254.128.1)ogr(172.24.4.10) --- (172.24.4.1)br-ex
(fip 172.24.4.7)
$ ip addr show eth0
2: eth0: mtu 1442 qdisc pfifo_fast
qlen 1000
inet 10.0.0.7/26 brd
Thanks, it's really more realistic.
On 2016/7/28 22:53, Guru Shetty wrote:
On 28 July 2016 at 07:48, Guru Shetty <g...@ovn.org
<mailto:g...@ovn.org>> wrote:
On 28 July 2016 at 06:55, Dong Jun <do...@dtdream.com
<mailto:do...@dtdream.com>> wrote:
Yes, this test case fail currently and success with the modification.
If there is another same test case, ignore this patch is OK.
On 2016/7/28 21:31, Guru Shetty wrote:
On 27 July 2016 at 23:30, Dongjun > wrote:
Signed-off-by: Dongjun