On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 12:58:36PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: > > Also, am I reading the code correctly that too many RMPs triggers an > > unexpected_recv fault? ?Is that what we want? > > This is an edge case I suppose. I made a judgement call that it > should but I'd like to here another opinion. I'm basically worried > about the case where someone is flooding CFM PDUs with randomly > generated MPIDs. It's not clear what the right response is in this > case, but it seems like a fail-closed approach is appropriate. > Especially if a controller is assuming that the cfm_remote_mpids > column is complete, this gives an indication that there is a problem.
OK. It's easy enough to change our decision later. > > I think that there's more than one reason that a CFM can fault, but > > the documentation only mentions one. > > I've added the following paragraph to the cfm_fault column documentation: > > Faults can be triggered for several reasons. Most importantly they > are triggered when no CCMs are received for a period of 3.5 times > the > transmission interval. Faults are also triggered when any CCMs > indicate that a Remote Maintenance Point is not receiving CCMs but > able to send them. Finally, a fault is triggered if a CCM is > received which indicates unexpected configuration. Notably, this > case arises when a CCM is received which advertises the local MPID. That is very complete. Thank you. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
