There is no reason for duplication, other than the reason for symmetricity of APIs, "send_flow_rem"(which already exists) and "send_flow_add"(could be added).
-Vasu *Vasu Dasari* On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 11:41 AM Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 10:37:42AM -0500, Vasu Dasari wrote: > > Ben, > > > > Thanks for the response. > > > > I expect the Learning event to come to the controller when a "learn" > > happens. In this case(as in tutorial), when a learn event happens, a new > > mac entry is added to table 10. Controller just needs to know that a > learn > > event happened on this {port, Mac, Vlan}. This information is > sufficiently > > populated in new flow information being added to table "10". So, I am > > leaning towards using a flow-monitoring on the table to see when an entry > > is added or removed to rely on MAC entry got added or removed to the > > switching pipeline. > > > > "learn" action has options like "limit" which limits number of entries > > added to a table, "send_flow_rem" which tells the controller when a flow > is > > removed, etc. All these flags are applied on top of the flows that are > > added. I was hoping to see an option like "send_flow_add" which tells the > > controller when a flow is added. Maybe this could be an enhancement to > > "learn" action. What do you think? > > It sounds like flow monitoring already covers that. Is there a reason > to duplicate the functionality? >
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
