Right for bonding rules. I think MPLS handling may benefit from it -- so that we don't have maintain special hmap for recirc ids. Then we may need to resubmit from table 254. At any rate, in case it is needed, I don't see a show stopper.
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 01:07:30PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 08:32:11AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 05:12:05PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > > > One thing that concerns me with using special tables and the like is > that > > > > it may not work well in conjunction with goto table and resubmit. > Although > > > > my implementation does not yet work with those actions either. > > > > > > I don't yet understand this concern. Can you explain further or give > an > > > example? > > > > I am just concerned about jumping from synthetic rules added > > in a special table(s) to regular rules in regular tables. > > But perhaps there is nothing to worry about. > > Without considering whether that is a problem (I do not see at first why > it would be), I don't think that Andy's bonding rules will need to do > that. >
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
