On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Lori Jakab <loja...@cisco.com> wrote: >> Hi Jesse, >> >> >> On 5/23/14, 2:07 AM, Jesse Gross wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Lori Jakab <loja...@cisco.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 5/21/14, 4:10 AM, Jesse Gross wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 7:02 AM, Lorand Jakab <loja...@cisco.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Implementation of the pop_eth and push_eth actions in the kernel, and >>>>>> layer 3 flow support. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lorand Jakab <loja...@cisco.com> >>>>> >>>>> Lori, can you take a look at the thread with Thomas Morin and see if >>>>> the outcome is reasonable to you? It seems like we've reached a >>>>> conclusion at this point. >>>> >>>> >>>> I have been following that thread, and I only submitted version 3 of my >>>> patches since you suggested at some point to include the Ethertype only >>>> when >>>> absolutely necessary. Based on our previous discussion, it wasn't >>>> absolutely necessary for LISP. >>>> >>>> By outcome, I assume you mean this message: >>>> >>>> http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2014-May/040291.html >>>> >>>> In that case, please confirm my interpretation of "unconditionally >>>> include >>>> it when it is part of the protocol" for LISP encapsulated packets: since >>>> the >>>> LISP encapsulation header doesn't contain the Ethertype of the packet >>>> that >>>> follows and it can be inferred from the first attribute in the packet >>>> (which >>>> can only be either IPv4 or IPv6), the Ethertype should not be included. >>> >>> Yes, what you have looks conceptually right. I've been waiting until >>> the other thread concludes to look at the patch in more detail. >> >> >> Now that I think we can consider the other thread concluded, can you please >> take a look at the patch? In my understanding, the conclusion was that LISP >> as-is should not send Ethertype information over Netlink, not even in the >> tunnel metadata, since the protocol itself doesn't send it on the wire. >> Once we implement GPE (see below), we can change that for GPE-enabled LISP >> tunnels. > > Yeah, it seems like the we're all set on this issue. I'll take a look > at the patch tomorrow.
Hi Lori, Would you mind sending out a rebased version of this series? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
