On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 09:11:08AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 09:49:45AM -0800, Jarno Rajahalme wrote: > > > > On Nov 5, 2013, at 12:34 AM, Simon Horman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > 3. OpenFlow1.3 > > > > > > This does not have the implicit VLAN tag push behaviour of OpenFlow1.0. > > > > > > An MPLS push action pushes an MPLS LSE before any VLAN tags that are > > > present. > > > > > > ofpact_get_SET_VLAN_VID(a)->push_vlan_if_needed and similar devices > > > can't be used in order to effect this logic when ofpact_check__() > > > is called via parse_ofp_str() as they are not filled in for > > > specific OF versions at that time. Again, for OpenFlow1.0 and > > > thus push_vlan_if_needed I believe this is cosmetic. But that is not > > > the case for the MPLS portion of this change. > > > > > > The net effect of this change on run-time is: > > > > > > * To increase logging under some circumstances as ofpacts_check() > > > may now be called up to four times instead of up to twice > > > for each invocation of parse_ofp_str__() > > > > > > * To disallow MPLS push actions on VLAN flows using OpenFlow1.3. > > > These did not comply to the OpenFlow1.3 as they would push an MPLS LSE > > > after any VLAN tags that were present. A subsequent patch will support > > > them in a manner that complies with the OpenFlow1.3. > > > > Are there still patterns of inconsistent (MPLS) actions after the subsequent > > patch? I.e., what would be the net effect of this patch after the MPLS push > > actions on VLAN flows is fixed for OF 1.3? > > >From the point of view of the specification, I think that inconsistency > detection should be complete for MPLS after this patch. Of course it is > quite possible there are scenarios that I have not considered. > > There are some restrictions on combinations of push and pop MPLS actions > with both themselves and other actions. These result from limitations in > the current implementation and are not treated as inconsistent before or > after this patch. Rather they are rejected doing translation. > > It is planned for most if not all of these restrictions to be removed in > the future using recirculation. However, I believe it would be not > difficult to enhance ofpacts_check__() to detect these and treat them as > inconsistent if it is desired. Basically duplicating part of the logic in > do_xlate_actions(). > > As these restrictions are not part of the specification my current > preference is to leave them out of ofpacts_check__().
Hi Jarno, Hi Ben, I'm wondering if you have had any (further) thoughts on this. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
