Looks good, thanks

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 11:41, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote:
> Multiple users have asked me about this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <[email protected]>
> ---
>  utilities/ovs-ofctl.8.in |    7 +++++++
>  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/utilities/ovs-ofctl.8.in b/utilities/ovs-ofctl.8.in
> index 1876929..4164bc9 100644
> --- a/utilities/ovs-ofctl.8.in
> +++ b/utilities/ovs-ofctl.8.in
> @@ -1098,6 +1098,13 @@ others.  \fIvalue\fR is a number between 0 and 65535, 
> inclusive.  A higher
>  have priority over an entry containing wildcards, so it has an implicit
>  priority value of 65535.  When adding a flow, if the field is not specified,
>  the flow's priority will default to 32768.
> +.IP
> +OpenFlow leaves behavior undefined when two or more flows with the
> +same priority can match a single packet.  Some users expect
> +``sensible'' behavior, such as more specific flows taking precedence
> +over less specific flows, but OpenFlow does not specify this and Open
> +vSwitch does not implement it.  Users should therefore take care to
> +use priorities to ensure the behavior that they expect.
>  .
>  .PP
>  The \fBadd\-flow\fR, \fBadd\-flows\fR, and \fBmod\-flows\fR commands
> --
> 1.7.2.5
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to