OK, then I think it's reasonable to add them to 'options'.
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 01:12:06PM +0530, Babu Shanmugam wrote: > I think these options will apply only for the VIFs (logical_ports with an > empty 'type'). > > -- > Babu > > On Thursday 31 December 2015 04:34 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > >I was hoping to keep the options column for options that are specific to a > >particular type of logical port. Do you think that the QoS options will be > >type specific or generic? > > > >On December 30, 2015 3:51:13 AM CST, Babu Shanmugam <bscha...@redhat.com> > >wrote: > > > > I am trying to implement the QOS APIs of openstack neutron in the > > networking-ovn plugin. I understand that I have to make the relevant > > changes in OVN code as well. > > > > I feel, 'options' field in Logical_Port table would be a decent > > candidate to bring QoS support in OVN [1]. I could see from the > > description that there are no 'options' mentioned for a VIF. Is there > > any other way we could implement it through the northbound database? > > > > [1]. > > Sample options - qos_(ingress | egress)_rate, qos_(ingress | > > egress)_burst, qos_dscp. > > > > > > -- > > Babu > > > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
