On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Darrell Ball <dlu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Do not install any potential logical switch "router type" > port arp responders. Logical router port arp responders > should be sufficient in this respect. > It seems a little wierd for a logical switch not proxying > for a remote VIF to be responding to arp requests and we > are not functionally using this capability in ovn. > Hi Darrell,
The arp responder for patch port is useful e.g. when a VM pings the default gateway IP. Would removing the flow cause the arp request get flooded? And what's the benefit of removing it here? Han _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
