On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo <majop...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi, sorry, I didn't see your comments this morning. Thanks a lot for all the > feedback, I'll shuffle things around. > > I thought about something like adding new columns too, but I didn't manage > to come up with anything that didn't make it less intuitive. > > The disadvantage of the current format is that you can't filter the > monitoring for chassis redirect ports on an specific chassis name (with > Current ovsdb API). May be two columns (one for names, another for > priorities would let us do that) > > I'm glad to hear suggestions for column names or structure here :)
I'm happy to collaborate on the proposed alternate schema. Maybe we can connect on IRC tomorrow to work on it? > > > > El 13 jun. 2017 10:41 p. m., "Russell Bryant" <russ...@ovn.org> escribió: > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Russell Bryant <russ...@ovn.org> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:31 AM, <majop...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> From: Miguel Angel Ajo <majop...@redhat.com> >>> >>> This patch handles multiple gateways with priorities in chassisredirect >>> ports, any gateway with a chassis redirect port will implement the >>> rules to de-encapsulate incomming packets for such port. >>> >>> And hosts targetting a remote chassisredirect port will setup a >>> bundle(active_backup, ..) action to each tunnel port, in the given >>> priority order. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Miguel Angel Ajo <majop...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> ovn/controller/binding.c | 9 +-- >>> ovn/controller/lflow.c | 6 +- >>> ovn/controller/lport.c | 119 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> ovn/controller/lport.h | 28 ++++++++++ >>> ovn/controller/ovn-controller.c | 5 +- >>> ovn/controller/physical.c | 114 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ >>> 6 files changed, 255 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) >> >> Some high level comments to start ... >> >> Ideally with a patch series, each patch should be applicable on its >> own. With this patch applied, some tests are failing for me. >> >> Documentation should also be included with whatever patch first >> introduces functionality, so I'd expect docs on the updated >> redirect-chassis format here. >> >> Please read over >> Documentation/internals/contributing/coding-style.rst. There are some >> minor style issues throughout the patch. I can point them out in a >> more detailed pass. >> >> The patch makes me wonder if we should introduce a more structured >> format for specifying chassis associated with a router port. It feels >> like we're encoding too much in a single option string. Maybe we >> should add a new "chassis" column to Logical_Router_Port, that can >> include a list of chassis, which would have to be a new record type in >> OVN northbound, containing much less info than the southbound >> counterpart. We'd have to add a similar new column to the >> Port_Binding table in OVN southbound. I'm curious what you and others >> think about this, or if the parsed option string is fine. > > Sorry, I replied to v1, but all comments apply to v2. > > -- > Russell Bryant > > -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev