Thanks for the reviews, Jarno!
On 04/12/2015 15:03, "Jarno Rajahalme" wrote:
>Thanks Daniele!
>
>Acked-by: Jarno Rajahalme
>
>Pushed to master,
>
> Jarno
>
>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 10:35 AM, Daniele Di Proietto
>> wrote:
>>
>> The NAT validation is similar (and based on) the existing conntrack
>
Thanks Daniele!
Acked-by: Jarno Rajahalme
Pushed to master,
Jarno
> On Dec 3, 2015, at 10:35 AM, Daniele Di Proietto
> wrote:
>
> The NAT validation is similar (and based on) the existing conntrack
> validation: when a dpif backer is created, we try to install a flow with
> the ct_state N
The NAT validation is similar (and based on) the existing conntrack
validation: when a dpif backer is created, we try to install a flow with
the ct_state NAT bits set. If the flow setup fails we assume that the
backer doesn't support NAT and we reject OpenFlow flows with a NAT
action or a match on
