* Kyle Mestery (kmestery) (kmest...@cisco.com) wrote: > On Nov 28, 2012, at 10:34 AM, Chris Wright <chr...@sous-sol.org> > wrote: > > * Kyle Mestery (kmestery) (kmest...@cisco.com) wrote: > >> On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:24 PM, Chris Wright <chr...@sous-sol.org> wrote: > >>> * Kyle Mestery (kmest...@cisco.com) wrote: > >>>> + > >>>> + vxlan_port->port = dst_port; > >>>> + vxlan_port->count++; > >>>> + hlist_add_head(&vxlan_port->hash_node, > >>>> + vxlan_hash_bucket(net, dst_port)); > >>> > >>> A little unusual to have a hashtable for this. Is this expected to be > >>> temporary until IANA port is allocated? > >>> > >> The idea is to allow destination port configuration on a per-tunnel basis, > >> so I needed to track this. As Jesse said, maybe a hash table was overkill > >> here, but that's a design point I think (e.g. I could have done a linked > >> list instead). > > > > Right, but destination port is meant to be a fixed port number. So I > > assume this is temporary, or are you saying this is a permanent feature? > > This is meant to be a permanent feature. After conversations with Jesse, it > became clear we wanted to default to the OTV port, but allow destination port > to be configurable by the user. In a prior email, Jesse noted some VXLAN > deployments using ports other than OTV. Even after talking with Larry, he > thought > it was a good idea to make this configurable as well.
Right. OTV is commonly, but not exclusively, used now. Post draft we should expect a final port number. But it's a relatively small set of functionality to maintain to keep the extra flexbility. In which case, I think the refcounting needs to be re-reviewed as it looked suspect to me. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
