On 02/03/15 at 11:27am, Pravin Shelar wrote: > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 10:19 AM, John W. Linville > <linvi...@tuxdriver.com> wrote: > > Thanks for doing that research for me! :-) You don't see any way to > > work with Dave M. around his objections? > > > > Violating an "upstream first" policy seems like you are making an "end > > run" in hopes of eventually coming back to Dave M. with an argument > > like "but people have been using this already". I could be wrong, > > but that probably won't make Dave any more happy about merging the > > patchset in the future... > > > I do not have any plans of pushing STT to upstream kernel. I do not > think increased STT usage will help us getting STT upstream in future. > STT is useful tunneling protocol regardless of whether it is upstream > or not and that is motivation of merging it to OVS repo.
It's very unfortunate that STT can't make it upstream. Having it in the OVS tree is the 2nd best option. STT obviously does some abuse but so do other encaps like VXLAN which abuse the outer UDP sport to benefit from RSS. It is however very hard to argue with the feedback given. _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
