On Oct 9, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Maciej Korczyński <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> Hi Murphy,
> 
> Thank you very much for your mail.
> 
> 2013/10/3 Murphy McCauley <[email protected]>
> It looks like maybe your POX isn't running the latest version of the carp 
> branch.  Can you switch to carp if necessary and pull the latest version and 
> try again?  I've pushed a change to openflow.discovery.
> 
> 
> I tried both beta and carp versions as you suggested but in both cases it 
> gives me the same errors as described in one of my previous mails.

Are you running the *latest* carp?  (Have you pulled from the repository?)

> Btw, just to inform, in carp, I can't run openflow.spanning_tree with 
> --no-flood --hold-down options.

What do you mean by "can't"?  Do you get errors?  Log messages?  I don't seem 
to have a problem with:
./pox.py openflow.spanning_tree --no-flood --hold-down openflow.discovery 
forwarding.l2_pairs

> If you can think of any further details that I could provide you, please let 
> me know.

The last question on the FAQ is full of ideas:
http://www.noxrepo.org/pox/manual

> A more general question: has anyone tried topologies with loops in Mininet 
> and POX with more that 10 switches and it actually worked?

I'm doing it with 20 switches (two hosts each) in a full mesh this very moment 
using the commandline above (also tested with l2_learning).

> Thanks again,
> Maciej
> 
>  
> -- Murphy
> 
> On Oct 1, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Maciej Korczyński <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
>> 2013/10/1 Murphy McCauley <[email protected]>
>> I've CCed this to pox-dev, which is the right list for POX related messages.
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you very much.
>>  
>> But the first thing I'd try is:
>> 
>> ./pox.py forwarding.l2_pairs openflow.discovery --eat-early-packets 
>> openflow.spanning_tree --no-flood --hold-down
>> 
>> 
>> I tried it straight away but unfortunately it gives the same results.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Maciej
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> -- Murphy
>> 
>> On Oct 1, 2013, at 2:32 PM, Maciej Korczyński <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> I'm trying to run a spanning tree in POX (./pox.py forwarding.l2_learning 
>>> openflow.discovery openflow.spanning_tree --no-flood --hold-down). I've 
>>> built a mininet network composed of 20 switches in a full mesh with 
>>> multiple hosts attached to each of switches and I get the following error 
>>> (also see the attachment):
>>> ERROR:openflow.of_01:[00-00-00-00-00-14 11] OpenFlow Error:
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: header: 
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error:   version: 1
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error:   type:    1 (OFPT_ERROR)
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error:   length:  36
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error:   xid:     6220717
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: type: OFPET_BAD_REQUEST (1)
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: code: OFPBRC_BUFFER_UNKNOWN (8)
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: datalen: 24
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: 0000: 01 0d 00 18 00 5e eb ad  00 01 88 7f 00 
>>> 09 00 08   .....^..........
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: 0010: 00 00 00 08 ff fb 00 00                 
>>>            ........
>>> ERROR:openflow.of_01:[00-00-00-00-00-14 11] OpenFlow Error:
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: header: 
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error:   version: 1
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error:   type:    1 (OFPT_ERROR)
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error:   length:  36
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error:   xid:     6220718
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: type: OFPET_BAD_REQUEST (1)
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: code: OFPBRC_BUFFER_UNKNOWN (8)
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: datalen: 24
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: 0000: 01 0d 00 18 00 5e eb ae  00 01 88 80 00 
>>> 09 00 08   .....^..........
>>> [00-00-00-00-00-14 11] Error: 0010: 00 00 00 08 ff fb 00 00                 
>>>            ........
>>> ^CDEBUG:openflow.spanning_tree:Spanning tree updated
>>> 
>>> I believe it might be a problem with an algorithm because when construct 
>>> networks composed of e.g. 7 switches in a full mesh there are no errors and 
>>> the communication works fine. Also, if I construct a network with loops but 
>>> less links (e.g. 20 switches, not in a full mesh topology but  every switch 
>>> is connected to 50% other switches) then it works better.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Could you please have a look and tell me if you had similar problems and 
>>> some ideas on how to fix that?
>>> Also, if I'm right and it's an algorithmic problem then do we have any 
>>> other alternative solution to openflow.spanning_tree or we are limited in 
>>> our simulations to tree or star network topologies?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Maciek
>>> <log.png>
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to