Re: [vpp-dev] QinQ and dot1ad any

2019-12-18 Thread Raj
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 7:43 PM John Lo (loj) wrote: > Without exact match on a L3 sub-interface, VPP has no mechanism to know what > VLAN tags > to use for packet output, such as ARP request packets or IP packets, on that > sub-interface. For a big QinQ network (like say about 8 - 10 S-VLAN e

[vpp-dev] Coverity run FAILED as of 2019-12-18 14:03:39 UTC

2019-12-18 Thread Noreply Jenkins
Coverity run failed today. Current number of outstanding issues are 2 Newly detected: 0 Eliminated: 0 More details can be found at https://scan.coverity.com/projects/fd-io-vpp/view_defects -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#14919): ht

[vpp-dev] thread context per node

2019-12-18 Thread amitmulayoff
Hello guys I have a question regarding thread context. I have a node that uses the function “vlib_put_frame_to_node()” to “move” the frame forward to the next node. My problem is that I want it to run in a context of worker thread instead of the main_vpp thread. Can I run the whole node in a c

Re: [vpp-dev] QinQ and dot1ad any

2019-12-18 Thread Jon Loeliger via Lists.Fd.Io
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 8:13 AM John Lo (loj) via Lists.Fd.Io wrote: > > Thus, sub-interface with "inner-dot1q any" is not an exact match > sub-interface by definition since no match is present on inner tag. > > I suppose the CLI: > >> create sub-interfaces GigabitEthernet3/0/3 50 dot1ad 50 inner

[vpp-dev] 20.01: three weeks before the API freeze

2019-12-18 Thread Andrew Yourtchenko
Hello all, It's again the time of the year, to begin the preparations for 20.01 VPP release. According to the agreed release plan [1], the API freeze will happen on the January 8 2020, at 18:00 UTC, so this is a first gentle reminder three weeks in advance. As usual - feel free to update the rel

Re: [vpp-dev] QinQ and dot1ad any

2019-12-18 Thread John Lo (loj) via Lists.Fd.Io
I don't think 8-10 S-VLANs with 4K C-VLANs totaling ~40K sub-interfaces will be an issue for VPP to handle, as long as the NICs being polled by device-input node from DPDK or other device drivers are not at a large scale. I am not clear what was done with PPPoE to address similar issues. I sup

Re: [vpp-dev] QinQ and dot1ad any

2019-12-18 Thread John Lo (loj) via Lists.Fd.Io
Hi Jon, You are right on both counts. It is the combination of dot1q/ad-any and exact-match that we should reject. It is also correct the check should be at lower level to reject the combination for both API and CLI. Regards, John From: Jon Loeliger Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 11:48