It seems that the behaviour is not so intuitive.
cf. https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1346861
Signed-off-by: YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamam...@valinux.co.jp>
---
FAQ | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
diff --git a/FAQ b/FAQ
index df5ac0e..d9ccc6e 100644
--- a/FAQ
+++ b/FAQ
@@ -731,6 +731,27 @@ A: It depends on mechanisms and configurations you want to
use.
you want to use ebtables rules.) On NetBSD, you might want to
consider using the bridge(4) with BRIDGE_IPF option.
+Q: It seems that Open vSwitch does nothing when I removed a port and
+ then immediately put it back. For example, consider that p1 is
+ a port of type=internal:
+
+ ovs-vsctl del-port br0 p1 -- \
+ add-port br0 p1 -- \
+ set interface p1 type=internal
+
+A: It's expected that Open vSwitch "skips" intermediate steps especially
+ when it's in the middle of an OVSDB transaction.
+
+ If you want to make Open vSwitch actually destroy and then re-create
+ the port for some side effects like resetting kernel setting for the
+ corresponding interface, you need to separate operations into multiple
+ OVSDB transactions. In the following example, the first ovs-vsctl,
+ which doesn't have --no-wait, will block until Open vSwitch reloads
+ the new configuration and removes the port:
+
+ ovs-vsctl del-port br0 p1
+ ovs-vsctl add-port br0 p1 -- \
+ set interface p1 type=internal
Quality of Service (QoS)
------------------------
--
1.9.4
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
