On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Simon Horman <simon.hor...@netronome.com> wrote: > Hi Jesse, > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 07:35:59AM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Brady Allen Johnson >> <brady.allen.john...@ericsson.com> wrote: >> > I wanted to mention though, currently the type 2 metadata (MD2) isnt a top >> > priority for us. It looks like its already been investigated how to use >> > some >> > existing OVS TLV code to implement this, so it should be easy to add MD2 in >> > the future. Can we consider first merging the core NSH functionality >> > without >> > MD2, and then submit MD2 in a subsequent patch? >> >> I think history tells us how this will end - similar to IPv4 options, >> implementations that don't implement TLVs will become deployed and >> then when there is a use for them it's no longer possible. Since I >> don't want OVS to have a half implementation or contribute to this >> issue, I'd like to see the whole protocol implemented before I apply >> anything. > > I see your point but I also see value in incrementally implementing a full > solution. If anything I feel that the current patch-set is already on the > large side though of course the design could be fleshed out to some extent > independently of the implementation and submitted patches.
I think this debate has pretty much been overcome by events at this point. I believe that there is already work underway to implement MD type 2. It seems like it would be most productive at this point to focus on the code rather than continuing to go back and forth on this. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
