On Jun 28, 2013, at 4:43 , ext Jesse Gross wrote:
> It's a validation limitation: if you have a vlan packet then you need
> to have an exact match on a corresponding EtherType. If you only want
> to match on the Ethernet header then it's fully maskable.
>
On OpenFlow (& meta-flow etc.) ethertyp
Sounds good to me.
Ethan
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Jesse Gross wrote:
> It's a validation limitation: if you have a vlan packet then you need
> to have an exact match on a corresponding EtherType. If you only want
> to match on the Ethernet header then it's fully maskable.
>
> On Thu, Jun
It's a validation limitation: if you have a vlan packet then you need
to have an exact match on a corresponding EtherType. If you only want
to match on the Ethernet header then it's fully maskable.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> Is the lack of support for bitwise masking
Is the lack of support for bitwise masking if the ethertype a kernel
limitation or a userspace one? If it's a userspace limitation I think
we should handle the case where it could be bitwise. If it's a kernel
limitation, I think the current patch is fine.
Acked-by: Ethan Jackson
On Thu, Jun 27
When converting the VLAN from a flow to an ODP key, the processing logic
would always store the VLAN ethertype. However, when handling a mask,
it should be a mask, not an ethertype. And since we don't support
bit-wise masking of the ethertype, just make it an exact-match mask.
Signed-off-by: Jus
