On 2013/12/4 13:24, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:24:28AM +0800, jerry wrote:
>> On 2013/12/3 13:08, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 10:18:43AM +0800, jerry wrote:
It may be easily supported to forward unicast packets. But I'm not sure
how to set OpenFlow rule
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:24:28AM +0800, jerry wrote:
> On 2013/12/3 13:08, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 10:18:43AM +0800, jerry wrote:
> >> It may be easily supported to forward unicast packets. But I'm not sure
> >> how to set OpenFlow rules when transferring multicast packets.
>
On 2013/12/3 13:08, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 10:18:43AM +0800, jerry wrote:
>> It may be easily supported to forward unicast packets. But I'm not sure
>> how to set OpenFlow rules when transferring multicast packets.
>> It's described as follows:
>> Firstly, multicast packets from
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 10:18:43AM +0800, jerry wrote:
> It may be easily supported to forward unicast packets. But I'm not sure
> how to set OpenFlow rules when transferring multicast packets.
> It's described as follows:
> Firstly, multicast packets from VM1 will be sent out by up-link netdevice
On 2013/12/3 1:58, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 05:42:58PM +, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) wrote:
>> My only curiosity here was what would the advantages of implementing
>> VEPA in OVS be over using the existing lldpad approach. I'd also be
>> interested to hear what Ben has to say her
n, 2 Dec 2013 06:07:20 +
>>> CC: dev@openvswitch.org; zh...@huawei.com
>>> Subject: [ovs-dev] $)A4p84: VEPA support in OVS
>>>
>>> $)AUb8vHKJGK>>
>>> $)ASCAKK>>
>>> -$)ASJ<~T-<~-----
>>> $)A7"
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery)
wrote:
> On Dec 2, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 05:42:58PM +, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) wrote:
>>> My only curiosity here was what would the advantages of implementing
>>> VEPA in OVS be over using the ex
On Dec 2, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 05:42:58PM +, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) wrote:
>> My only curiosity here was what would the advantages of implementing
>> VEPA in OVS be over using the existing lldpad approach. I'd also be
>> interested to hear what Ben has
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 05:42:58PM +, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) wrote:
> My only curiosity here was what would the advantages of implementing
> VEPA in OVS be over using the existing lldpad approach. I'd also be
> interested to hear what Ben has to say here. Since VEPA is already
> mostly impleme
> > $)ASCAKK >
> > -$)ASJ<~T-<~-
> > $)A7"<~HK: Kyle Mestery (kmestery) [mailto:kmest...@cisco.com]
> > $)A7"KMJ1 > $)AJU<~HK: Lilijun (Jerry)
> > $)A3-KM: ; Qianhuibin (Huibin QIAN, Euler); Zhbzg
> > $)AV
On Nov 30, 2013, at 12:46 AM, jerry wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone have a plan to support for VEPA in OVS?
>
> In my opinion, we can achieve such function using two methods:
> 1) Add flow rules on each VM port to lead traffic to physical port.
> 2) Add a port type for physical port and do MAC-
Hi all,
Does anyone have a plan to support for VEPA in OVS?
In my opinion, we can achieve such function using two methods:
1) Add flow rules on each VM port to lead traffic to physical port.
2) Add a port type for physical port and do MAC-learning on VM ports.
The two both method need to fix the
12 matches
Mail list logo
