Andy and Manikanta,
I agree with Andy/ I don't think there is a necessity for any design
changes in OVS for qinq at least for Open Flow 1.1. I am working on
debugging/testing the patch now.
Right now I am working on debugging my double tagging patch as specified
in 802.1ad with an outer TPID of 0x88a8 and this is what I am testing
against. There are some legacy switches in use that support an older
form of qinq with outer tags of 0x8100 or 0x9100. Please let me know
your thoughts on this. My suggestion would be to allow any tpid the
controller sets in the flow to work.
I am not sure about more than 2 levels of stacked tags. I haven't seen
that and I don't think it is specified but I would like to hear your
thoughts.
--Tom
On 4/14/2014 10:11 AM, Andy Zhou wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 4:27 AM, Manikanta Srinivas
<srinivas...@outlook.com> wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for your efforts. We are interested in QinQ implementation of
openvswitch. After going through the patch, we are left with following
queries.
1. We think there should be a separate mode to support qinq tunnel. This can
be achieved by implementing a new configuration parameter in ovsdb. Do you
have any plans to implement this approach or any other ideas ?
What kind of new configuration do you have in mind?
2. The structure "sw_flow_key" should be extended to represent the
information of outer VLAN (service VLAN) in flow key. Similar change is also
required in flow structure (lib/flow.h) used in user space.
We don't strictly need those changes for Thomas' patch. open-flow1.0
and 1.1 support
exactly one vlan tag. Open flow 1.1 requires 802.1ad tag to be recognized.
Thomas' patch is a great step forward to support Openflow 1.1.
Openflow 1.2+ removed packet parsing requirements. So we could support
the model you proposed.
However, this would limit us to support fix number of VLAN tags, for
example, double tagging as you have suggested.
This is not a bad idea and should cover most of the use cases out
there. On the other hand, Openflow
spec does not rule out supporing multiple vlan tags. Since we are
going to support MLPS label stacking, we could also support
vlan stacking without much added efforts.
Please correct our understanding if we went wrong somewhere.
This is good time to voice your opinion and use cases. We'd like to
flush out the design for openflow 1.2+ support.
Thank you for your interest and participation.
Thanks and Regards,
Manikanta Srinivas
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
