On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Lori Jakab wrote:
> [Reviving and older thread...]
>
>
> On Jun 21, 2013, at 2:50 AM, Jesse Gross wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Lori Jakab wrote:
>>>
>>> On 6/11/13 1:09 AM, Jesse Gross wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Lori Jak
[Reviving and older thread...]
On Jun 21, 2013, at 2:50 AM, Jesse Gross wrote:
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Lori Jakab wrote:
On 6/11/13 1:09 AM, Jesse Gross wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Lori Jakab wrote:
At a high level, we would introduce layer 3 (tunnel) vports, and LIS
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Lori Jakab wrote:
> On 6/11/13 1:09 AM, Jesse Gross wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Lori Jakab wrote:
>>>
>>> At a high level, we would introduce layer 3 (tunnel) vports, and LISP
>>> would be such a vport. Whenever a packet that ingressed on a L2 v
On 6/11/13 1:09 AM, Jesse Gross wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Lori Jakab wrote:
At a high level, we would introduce layer 3 (tunnel) vports, and LISP
would be such a vport. Whenever a packet that ingressed on a L2 vport
needs to egress on a L3 vport, we apply the internal pop_eth acti
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 03:09:33PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Lori Jakab wrote:
> > At a high level, we would introduce layer 3 (tunnel) vports, and LISP
> > would be such a vport. Whenever a packet that ingressed on a L2 vport
> > needs to egress on a L3 vport, w
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Lori Jakab wrote:
> At a high level, we would introduce layer 3 (tunnel) vports, and LISP
> would be such a vport. Whenever a packet that ingressed on a L2 vport
> needs to egress on a L3 vport, we apply the internal pop_eth action
> automatically. For packets goi
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 02:47:49PM +0300, Lori Jakab wrote:
> On 6/7/13 3:18 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> >Have you considered the OpenFlow implications? OpenFlow itself is
> >somewhat Ethernet centric. Improving this has been in discussion, in
> >various ways, in the "extensibility" working group at O
On 6/7/13 3:18 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 12:56:35AM +0300, Lori Jakab wrote:
The LISP tunneling support as of now is not yet ready for upstreaming,
for reasons outlined in this message:
http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2013-February/025459.html
One solution to the above
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 12:56:35AM +0300, Lori Jakab wrote:
> The LISP tunneling support as of now is not yet ready for upstreaming,
> for reasons outlined in this message:
>
> http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2013-February/025459.html
>
> One solution to the above issues is to make OVS less
Hi,
The LISP tunneling support as of now is not yet ready for upstreaming,
for reasons outlined in this message:
http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2013-February/025459.html
One solution to the above issues is to make OVS less Ethernet specific,
meaning that it should accept and work with pack
10 matches
Mail list logo
