On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 03:20:52PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote: > It's possible to imagine that a switch might want to report additional > capabilities related to Geneve beyond just the number of options and > how much space they can consume. Some examples include additional > restrictions on parsing (if this command is used for non-OVS implementations > or OVS changes how it works) and per-packet actions that can't be done > generically (such as checksums or encryption). It's not yet clear if > these will be necessary or if OpenFlow is the right place to expose > them. However, it's easy to do now and there is very little cost so > it seems like a good idea to leave some additional reserved space. > > Signed-off-by: Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com>
I'd consider s/pad/zero/ to make it easier for receivers to be sure (later) that they're interpreting non-garbage. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
