On Nov 6, 2012, at 1:27 PM, Jesse Gross <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Kyle, > > Things are continuing to move along and I think that most of the major > infrastructure pieces are either complete or coming along nicely. One area > that might make sense for you to work on is the VXLAN dataplane support. I > know that you've been maintaining Ben's patch out of tree so hopefully there > isn't too much that needs to be done. In the past I was reluctant to apply > it on it's own but I think now that everything else is coming together it > makes sense. > > A couple things that come to mind that you might want to look into: > * Any updates to apply against master (it's looks pretty current but I'm > guessing that the recent header caching changes will require some updates). > * I think we probably want to make the destination port configurable as part > of the port properties from the database. Fixing it in the kernel seems a > little restrictive.
Hi Jesse: I spoke with our IETF folks, and they said that all shipping VXLAN implementations are using the OTV port (8472) as the destination port for VXLAN. Given this, do we still want to make this configurable? Please see section 3.1 of the L2 LISP draft here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smith-lisp-layer2-01 Thanks, Kyle > * It probably makes sense to use the skb rxhash and the ephemeral port range > to generate the source port as it is more similar to upstream. > > Thanks, > Jesse > > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:19 AM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) <[email protected]> > wrote: > Jesse and Pravin: > > Curious what the current state of the tunnel work is. About 4 weeks back, > Jesse had sent out an email with some work items. I have some cycles now to > continue working on this, but wanted to touch base with you guys to see where > things are at and what areas you may need help with. > > Thanks! > Kyle > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
