Re: [vpp-dev] Unable to build router plugin

Hi carlito, I've had problems muck like yours. Sometimes VPP updates its functions while vppsb is still the same, so you need to change it to make it work. In my problem I just updated the vppsb's outdated function to the new one and it worked. As you know, vppsb is a plugin for vpp and it calls v

Re: [vpp-dev] VPP on kernel without dpdk

o VPP has native drivers support that also support batching. > > Ray K > > On 12/09/2018 06:58, Mehran Memarnejad wrote: > >> hello >> some papers quoted that it is possible to run VPP on kernel without DPDK >> as far as I know VPP uses DPDP NIC drivers in polling mo

[vpp-dev] VPP on kernel without dpdk

hello some papers quoted that it is possible to run VPP on kernel without DPDK as far as I know VPP uses DPDP NIC drivers in polling mode to handle packets in batch in the case of "no DPDK" how can this batching be done? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. V

Re: [vpp-dev] Virtual Routing and Forwarding #vpp

I am not a member of VPP team but as far as I know you can create a new routing table by using "ip table add X" and then you can bind an interface to that newly created routing table by using "set interface ip table GigabitEthernet1/0/0 X" You should notice that VPP is the dataplane so it needs to

Re: [vpp-dev] VPP crashes on multi core

nable > standard. > > > > *From:* vpp-dev@lists.fd.io *On Behalf Of *Mehran > Memarnejad > *Sent:* Friday, August 17, 2018 5:51 AM > *To:* vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > *Subject:* [vpp-dev] VPP crashes on multi core > > > > Hi, > > In default configuration of vpp on

[vpp-dev] VPP crashes on multi core

Hi, In default configuration of vpp on single core, everything seems ok but when I want to get the most out of my hardware resources and modify vpp startup config, it crashes at some stages. Here is some carshes: 1- I set interface's IP and then when I plugged cables in ports, It suddenly carshes a

[vpp-dev] mpls-tunnel

Hi, How can I create mpls-tunnel with arbitrary name? thanks -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#9588): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/9588 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/21999692/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.f

[vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

arding efficiency. I still don’t understand the purpose of pushing >> dot1ad tag on packet at customer interface input in your VPLS test setup. >> It just make L2 forwarding slower because of the VLAN tag push/pop overhead >> on each packet and does not serve any purpose, AFAIK. -

[vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

packet at customer interface input in your VPLS test setup. > It just make L2 forwarding slower because of the VLAN tag push/pop overhead > on each packet and does not serve any purpose, AFAIK. -John > > > > *From:* Mehran Memarnejad > *Sent:* Sunday, May 27, 2018 8:56 AM >

Re: [vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

that I should not consider customer's 802.1q tag in PE. On Monday, May 28, 2018, Mehran Memarnejad wrote: > Hi, > According to Wikipedia's page for 802.1ad: > > "A tag stack creates a mechanism for Internet Service Providers > <https://en.m.wikipedia.o

[vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

packet at customer interface input in your VPLS test setup. > It just make L2 forwarding slower because of the VLAN tag push/pop overhead > on each packet and does not serve any purpose, AFAIK. -John > > > > *From:* Mehran Memarnejad > *Sent:* Sunday, May 27, 2018 8:56 AM >

[vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

arding efficiency. I still don’t understand the purpose of pushing >> dot1ad tag on packet at customer interface input in your VPLS test setup. >> It just make L2 forwarding slower because of the VLAN tag push/pop overhead >> on each packet and does not serve any purpose, AFAIK. -

Re: [vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

ag on packet at customer interface input in your VPLS test setup. > It just make L2 forwarding slower because of the VLAN tag push/pop overhead > on each packet and does not serve any purpose, AFAIK. -John > > > > *From:* Mehran Memarnejad > *Sent:* Sunday, May 27, 2018

Re: [vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

er of tags and their value. I think this is the bug. Am I right?? On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 5:18 PM, Mehran Memarnejad wrote: > Hi, > The patch makes it work perfectly. Now the Second tag (SPtag) is removed. > But I think there is another bug here. > > First scenario: > PE1

Re: [vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

, 2018 at 5:51 AM, John Lo (loj) wrote: > I just submitted a patch. Can you give it a try if this resolve the > problem? -John > > https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/12750/ > > > > *From:* Mehran Memarnejad > *Sent:* Friday, May 25, 2018 1:24 PM > > *To:* John Lo (loj) ; vp

Re: [vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

es not function properly. > If you remove the tag rewrite config from these GigabitEthernet5/0/0 > customer ports on both PEs, I suppose it should start to work. Any reason > you want to have the additional dot1ad tag on the packets for forwarding in > the BD and MPLS tunnel? > > > >

Re: [vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

ation configured on each > interface. > > > > Regards, > > John > > > > *From:* vpp-dev@lists.fd.io *On Behalf Of *Mehran > Memarnejad > *Sent:* Thursday, May 24, 2018 8:12 AM > *To:* vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > *Subject:* [vpp-dev] dot1ad tag > > > >

[vpp-dev] dot1ad tag

Hi, I have configured VPLS in VPP somehow like this link . In addition to the above configurations, I want to add a second vlan tag i.e. 802.1ad (QinQ). To achieve this, I entered following command in both PE