Hi KK,
Thanks for posting this to the openflow-spec board. I do think the
priority should be maintained since two identical flow matches can exist
with different priorities. If one of them is removed, it could be useful
to know which one. To identify a flow uniquely, I believe you need the
ofp_match & priority (unless a cookie is used).
- Derek
On 02/22/2011 03:27 AM, kk yap wrote:
Hi,
I believe maintaining the wildcards would be enough. To me, the
following two matches are the same:
Wildcards = ALL - DL_TYPE, DL_TYPE = 5, IP_SRC = 100...
Wildcards = ALL - DL_TYPE, DL_TYPE = 5, IP_SRC = 0...
I believe Ben and Justin is saying that it is reasonable to maintain
the wildcard field. Seems like we have a working solution?
I will post this on the openflow-spec list for the words to be cleared
up. The priority field worries me a little more, such I think exact
match is normalized to priority 65535? Should that be maintained in
flow_removed? I wonder.
Regards
KK
On 21 February 2011 09:30, Ben Pfaff<b...@nicira.com> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Derek Cormier
<derek.corm...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
I see what you mean and I agree that a switch shouldn't store unnecessary
information. But is it really a burden in this case? The wildcards are
stored in a single 32-bit integer, so no extra space is needed.
The data structure that OVS uses for classification requires that
wildcarded fields
be zeroed for efficiency reasons. In other words, storing the wildcards isn't a
big deal, but storing nonzero values of wildcarded fields would require extra
memory. So I'd rather not do it, although certainly it's not a huge
deal if in the
OVS has to.
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_openvswitch.org
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_openvswitch.org
