On 2/2/17, 5:50 PM, David Miller wrote: > I see a lot of "complexity of bridging layer" pushback on these > changes, and I understand where that is coming from. > > But really this isn't even, at a high level, really a bridging change. > > What it's doing is making lwtunnel objects more useful. > > Now that we have lightweight tunnels and netdevs, we will constantly > have this struggle trying to figure out how to make lwtunnel objects > apply to the same cases that netdevs currently only work for. > > Because once you run into one of these situations where only netdevs > work, you are screwed and lwtunnels and their scalability benefit > might as well not even exist. > > To be completely honest, in this case it's pretty clear: > > 1) It makes vxlan lwtunnel objects more usable for bridges. > > 2) It does not make lwtunnels more bloated or consume more memory > or cpu in the dataplane fast paths. > > 3) It makes uptake of lwtunnels higher, because they can be used > in more places. > > So I think this change is a win and a move forward.
Thanks David
