Re: [vpp-dev] mpls tunnel

If you want to resolve a recursive path that has outgoing labels, ie. via 1.1.1.1 out-labels 33 then the resolving route in the FIB MUST also have out-labels. This is because you are in effect layering LSPs (the tunnel is the upper/inner layer and the route the lower/outer layer). The out-lab

Re: [vpp-dev] First packet is lost when ARP resolution occurs

Packet drop with unresolved IP neighbor adjacency is the expected behavior. As the packet will trigger an ARP request to resolve the adjacency, subsequent packets with the same destination address will start to flow if the adjacency is resolved on receiving a reply. -John From: vpp-dev@lists

Re: [WARNING : MESSAGE ENCRYPTED] [vpp-dev] [VPP]Questions about VPP behavior of over performance limit

Satomi-san I cant open the attachment, it appears to be passwd protected -M On 6/21/18, 4:02 AM, "vpp-dev@lists.fd.io on behalf of 井上里美" wrote: Dear VPP team, I'm Satomi Inoue and I belong to NTT Laboratories. We evaluate VPP and CSR1KV. Could you tell me the following

Re: [vpp-dev] IKEv2 integration, ipsecX interface and related SPD

Hi, Replies inline. Regards, Radu On 6/21/2018 5:15 PM, berengerf via Lists.Fd.Io wrote: Hello, I have some questions regarding the integration of IKEv2 within VPP. When an IKEv2 negotiation succeeds, an ipsecX interface is created. Then in order to encrypt the outgoing traffic, the interfa

[vpp-dev] First packet is lost when ARP resolution occurs

Hello, I noticed that some packets were lost during IKEv2 negotiation with VPP. After investigation it seems that it is related to ARP resolution. When the ARP cache is empty and a packetX needs to be sent, VPP will send an ARP request (which is right), but the packetX won't be sent afterwards.

[vpp-dev] IKEv2 integration, ipsecX interface and related SPD

Hello, I have some questions regarding the integration of IKEv2 within VPP. When an IKEv2 negotiation succeeds, an ipsecX interface is created. Then in order to encrypt the outgoing traffic, the interface has to be set up manually, an address needs to be assigned to this interface (the address

Re: [vpp-dev] dpdk drivers

* Remove the installed vpp-dpdk-xxx Debian package [if you installed them]. * Add your e1000 driver patch to /dpdk/dpdk-_patches * Rebuild and install vpp HTH... Dave From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io On Behalf Of xulang Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2018 8:40 AM To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io Sub

[vpp-dev] vpp openwrt

Hi all, Is there anybody have tried to build vpp for OpenWRT? Whether if there are some files about this. Regards, Xlangyun -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#9668): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/9668 Mute This Topic: https://

[vpp-dev] dpdk drivers

Hi all I have changed something in the function "eth_em_xmit_pkts", which belong to e1000 driver. But I found out that my change does not work. Its object file is "librte_pmd_e1000.a", but I do not know how it connected to vpp. What can I do to make this change effective. Regards, Xlangyun -

Re: [WARNING : MESSAGE ENCRYPTED] [vpp-dev] [VPP]Questions about VPP behavior of over performance limit

> VPP rx/tx counter is 0 Last time I have seen this behavior, it was caused by insufficient value of mem-mbufs [1] parameter. The symptom is large amount of mbuf allocation errors in statistics. See this [0] thread for more context. Vratko. [0] https://lists.fd.io/g/csit-dev/topic/csit_ip4_tes

Re: [vpp-dev] mpls tunnel

Hi, It is not a valid solution.(at least "show mpls tunnel" says that) Here is the new configuration and result: * mpls tunnel l2-only via 1.1.1.1 out-labels 33* * ip route add 1.1.1.1/32 via 192.168.1.1 GigabitEthernet13/0/0* result: I expect to see someth