On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) <kmest...@cisco.com> wrote: > So, we realize the need to add the NSH code upstream into the kernel. > But in parallel to this work, we're wondering if it would be ok to add a new > vport-nsh in the data path code. This would allow for stacking NSH headers > on whatever tunnel is required, per the RFC, by using flows to direct traffic > between ports. In parallel, we're going to work to get the NSH code upstream > into the Linux kernel and the iproute2 package for configuration using a CLI. > > Does this approach sound ok?
Since we've been pushing hard to make the out-of-tree code closely track upstream, I would be very hesitant to apply anything that isn't ready to go upstream. Ready for upstream doesn't necessarily mean that configuration has to available through iproute2 but it should be in an essentially final form and make sense purely in the context of what's there plus the new OVS code. I'm not sure if that's true of what you're proposing or would this be more temporary? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
