On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 12:35 PM Vladislav Odintsov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I’m playing with ACL rules to solve some specific use-case and found a 
> behaviour of ovn-controller, which seems strange to me.
> Can somebody please clarify whether it’s a bug or I expect something that I 
> shouldn’t :)
>
> I’ve got next topology with two logical switches, two LSPs and 2 port-groups.
>
> lswitch1:
>   port1 (192.168.1.10/24)
>
> lswitch2:
>   port2 (10.0.0.10/24)
>
>
> port_group1:
>   port1
>
> port_group2:
>   port2
>
> Simplified ACLs look like this:
>
> # ovn-nbctl acl-list port_group1
> from-lport  2000 (inport == @port_group2 && ip4) allow-related
>   to-lport  2000 (outport == @port_group2 && ip4) allow-related
>
> ovn-controller has next error:
>
> 2021-12-03T16:45:22.911Z|00048|lflow|WARN|error parsing match "reg0[7] == 1 
> && (inport == @port_group2 && ip4)": Syntax error at `@port_group2' expecting 
> port group name.
>
> If I add a fake LSP to lswitch1 and add it to port-group2, this error doesn’t 
> appear.
> It looks to me like the l_ctx_in->port_groups in consider_logical_flow__() is 
> filled with only port-groups from current datapath logical switch port...
>
> OVN main branch codebase.

I think this is as expected.  If you run "ovn-sbctl list port_group"
you'd see a port group in SB DB for each datapath.

Also the first ACL (with from-lport) seems odd to me since in the
ingress pipeline of lswitch1,  there is no possibility of matching
"inport" for the ports of lswitch2.

Thanks
Numan

>
> Regards,
> Vladislav Odintsov
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to