On Nov 24, 2011, at 5:25 AM, jamal wrote: > The most basic IMO is to use netlink if you are doing > it from a programmatic interface. You seem to be doing that > already for other items (eg HTB) in the setup. There are > a few libraries out there you could use but i realize > that they may not match your license requirements. > Maybe you could isolate your netlink code and make it > standalone based on the license you use and people who > need that could use it.
You're right--calling tc directly through system() is kind of ugly. That code was written a *long* time ago when we wanted a quick QoS story. As you mentioned, we use netlink to configure traffic shaping, so we have all the pieces at this point. I just think no one ever bothered to clean up that little wart in userspace. I'll put that on my to-do list. Obviously, this doesn't affect the kernel portions. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. > The other thing, is you match every flow on the specific > virtual port - this may be design intent but it appears > very inflexible. We encourage users to use shaping, since it generally provides better results (and we do expose per-flow granularity there). As a result, we haven't seen a need to improve support for policing. --Justin _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
