On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simon Horman <ho...@verge.net.au> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:30AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:55PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: >> > as far as I can tell no one is actively working on the following item in >> > OPENFLOW-1.1+. So I have made a start it. >> > >> > * The new in_phy_port field in OFPT_PACKET_IN needs some kind of >> > implementation. It has a sensible interpretation for tunnels >> > but in general the physical port is not in the datapath for OVS >> > so the value is not necessarily meaningful. We might have to >> > just fix it as the same as in_port. >> > [required for OF1.1; optional for OF1.2+] >> >> Sounds good! I hope you're planning to do something simple. > > My main plan is to allow communication of the in_phy_port field > between ovs-vswtichd and the datapath by adding a new netlink key. > Then to expose that in packet_in messages. I also have it in mind > to allow matching on the in_phy_port, but probably later. > > As for determining the in_phy_port. My plan is to determine the vport that > tunneled packets arrive on in their encapsulated form and use that as the > in_phy_port. I plan to not set the in_phy_port for non-tunnelled packets; > to set it to the same as in_port for non-tunnelled; or some combination of > the two depending on how the code pans out.
How do you plan on getting the physical vport? It seems a little challenging because the port might not be attached to OVS at all or at the very least it is likely not attached to the same bridge. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
