Hi, Trema's packet parser (set_match_from_packet()) is b). Trema also provides normalize function (normalize_match()) to absorb implemental differences of different switches.
Trema-switch is a). Regards, HIDE > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Christian Esteve Rothenberg > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 11:47 PM > To: Eder Leão Fernandes > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [openflow-discuss] How masked values are stored in the Flow > Table on OpenFlow 1.2? > > Hi all, > > just looking for further clarification on the issue of how to handle > OXM wildcarded flow entries. > > If the controller sends a flow mod command that includes a flow match > as follows: > IP 192.168.1.1 IP_mask= 255.255.0.0 > > How should the flow entry installed by the switch look like? > > a) IP 192.168.1.1 IP_mask= 255.255.0.0 > > or > > b) IP 192.168.0.0 IP_mask= 255.255.0.0 > > ? > > While for actual packet matching purposes it does not matter, it > matters when you want to query about statitstics or when you want to > modify flow entries, as the field and mask values needs to be > syntatctically equal, not functionally equal (i.e. after applying the > mask). > > Our interpretation is that the mask should not be applied by the switch > when > installing the entry and should be respect what was sent by the controller > (a). However, we have encoutered 1.2 prototype implementations that > seem to have opted for the > second interpretation (b). > > That said, it seems like a good best practice that the controller > itself applies any widlcards to the match field before sending any > protocol message with an OXM flow match structure. > > -Christian > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Eder Leão Fernandes > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have a question regarding how masked OXM values are stored in the flow > > tables. I would like to know if the values should be stored with the > > respective mask applied? > > For example: > > If I have an IP source value 192.168.16.150 and mask 0xffffff00. The value > > should be stored as 192.168.16.150 or 192.168.16.0? > > > > I'm asking this because, when testing Ryu Controller with CPqD > > implementation of OpenFlow 1.2 software switch, I noticed that tests with > > masked fields expect values with the mask > > applied, leading to failures, since the switch implementation doesn't > stores > > the values with the masks applied. > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Eder. > > > > -- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > openflow-discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss > > > > > > -- > Christian > _______________________________________________ > openflow-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss _______________________________________________ openflow-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
