On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 9:02 AM Lazuardi Nasution <mrxlazuar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi David, > > I think I can understand your opinion. So your target is to prevent frames > with those ethernet addresses from reaching CP, right? FYI, I'm using bonded > VFs of bonded PFs as OVS-DPDK interfaces, so offcourse LACP should be handled > by bonded PFs only. What is the version of DPDK & OVS used here, BTW? Thanks
> > Best regards, > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 11:54 PM David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 5:46 PM Lazuardi Nasution <mrxlazuar...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > HI David, >> > >> > Don't you think that offload of reserved Ethernet address should be >> > disabled by default? >> >> What OVN requests in this trace (dropping) makes sense to me if those >> lacp frames are to be ignored at the CP level. >> I don't see why some ethernet address would require some special >> offloading considerations, but maybe others have a better opinion on >> this topic. >> >> >> -- >> David Marchand >>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
