On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 10:59:14AM +0100, Daniele Venturino wrote:
> Looks good to me.
> I also did some fast tests and the behaviour is now correct.
>
> I saw that this has already been merged, but here's my ack
>
> Acked-by: Daniele Venturino
Thanks a lot for the review!
_
Looks good to me.
I also did some fast tests and the behaviour is now correct.
I saw that this has already been merged, but here's my ack
Acked-by: Daniele Venturino
> Il giorno 06/mar/2015, alle ore 05:21, Ben Pfaff ha scritto:
>
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 05:33:57PM -0800, Ansis Atteka wrote
On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 05:33:57PM -0800, Ansis Atteka wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > Until now, if both STP and RSTP were enabled, ovs-vswitchd would actually
> > enable only the one it first noticed to be enabled, and actually turn off
> > the setting for the othe
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Until now, if both STP and RSTP were enabled, ovs-vswitchd would actually
> enable only the one it first noticed to be enabled, and actually turn off
> the setting for the other one in the database (!). This doesn't match
> ovs-vswitchd behavior
Until now, if both STP and RSTP were enabled, ovs-vswitchd would actually
enable only the one it first noticed to be enabled, and actually turn off
the setting for the other one in the database (!). This doesn't match
ovs-vswitchd behavior for other contradictory configurations, so this
commit cha
