On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 02:07:22PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: > > > On Sep 5, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 05:39:01PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: > >> Introduce a new "direction" column to the ACL table that accepts the > >> values "to-lport" and "from-lport". Also reserve the ACL priority 65535 > >> for return traffic associated with the "allow-related" action. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Justin Pettit <jpet...@nicira.com> > > > > I'd prefer to squash this with the commit (presumably patch 2/2) that > > actually implements the newly documented behavior. > > As you noted in the follow-up message, the implementation is actually in the > patch that adds "allow-related" support. There's no reason not to add > support now; it just didn't occur to me based on the order I was working on > these patches. I've appended an incremental that add the support. Does it > look reasonable? > > > Here: > > > > <ref table="Logical_Flow" db="OVN_Southbound"/> table. The > > <code>outport</code> logical port is only available in the > > <code>to-lport</code> direction. > > > > I'd consider adding a parenthetical to make it perfectly clear, e.g.: > > > > <ref table="Logical_Flow" db="OVN_Southbound"/> table. The > > <code>outport</code> logical port is only available in the > > <code>to-lport</code> direction (the <code>inport</code> is > > available in both directions). > > Okay, I updated it. > > > Acked-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> > > Thanks. If the incremental looks good, I'll push the series.
The incremental looks good (and smaller than I expected). _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
