Thanks. Is there any forum where i can discuss the design for same? Regards, Bindiya
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:22 AM Justin Pettit <jpet...@ovn.org> wrote: > I understand. This has been discussed previously on the mailing list. > You are welcome to submit a patch upstream to provide that capability, but > I suspect you will get some resistance--especially from the Linux kernel > community. > > --Justin > > > > On Aug 27, 2019, at 11:25 PM, bindiya Kurle <bindiyaku...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Justin, > > > > Thanks for the clarification. I agree to your point ,but consider a > use-case if I have routing decision only based on destination ip then as > per current implementation, ovs will add 2 flows (in data path)for packets > coming from different source and if the TTL happens to be different for > them .This will reduce number of flows that can be supported with ovs. If > decrement TTL was done in kernel ,it would have ended in adding one flow > only. > > > > Regards, > > Bindiya > > > > Regards, > > Bindiya > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:48 PM Justin Pettit <jpet...@ovn.org> wrote: > > I think it was considered cleaner from an ABI perspective, since it > doesn't require another action, since "set" was already supported. In > practice, I don't think it's a problem, since usually a TTL decrement is > associated with a routing decision, and TTLs tend to be fairly static > between two hosts. > > > > --Justin > > > > > > > On Aug 27, 2019, at 1:11 AM, bindiya Kurle <bindiyaku...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > hi , > > > I have a question related to dec_ttl action implemented in datapath. > > > when dec_ttl action is configured in OVS following action get added > in datapath. > > > > > > recirc_id(0),in_port(2),eth(),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(ttl=64,frag=no), > packets:3, bytes:294, used:0.068s, actions:set(ipv4(ttl=63)),3, > > > > > > if packet comes with different TTL on same port then one more action > get added in datapath. > > > for ex: > > > recirc_id(0),in_port(2),eth(),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(ttl=9,frag=no), > packets:3, bytes:294, used:0.068s, actions:set(ipv4(ttl=8)),3, > > > > > > Could someone please explain why dec_ttl is implemeted as a set > action rather than dec_ttl action. > > > > > > > > > I mean , why for different ttl one more rule get added rather than > just adding it as following as done in userspace > > > > > > recirc_id(0),in_port(3),eth(),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(frag=no), > packets:3, bytes:294, used:0.737s, actions:dec_ttl,2 > > > > > > Regards, > > > Bindiya > > > _______________________________________________ > > > discuss mailing list > > > disc...@openvswitch.org > > > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss > > > >
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss