On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 08:18:22AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:13:58PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:08:17PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:21:28PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:41:11AM +0
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:13:58PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:08:17PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:21:28PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:41:11AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > > I am wondering if you would like m
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:08:17PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:21:28PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:41:11AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > I am wondering if you would like me to add support for matching on
> > > in_phy_port, which appears to b
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:21:28PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:41:11AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > I am wondering if you would like me to add support for matching on
> > in_phy_port, which appears to be optional. I am quite happy to do so, and
> > indeed I have most of
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:41:11AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> I am wondering if you would like me to add support for matching on
> in_phy_port, which appears to be optional. I am quite happy to do so, and
> indeed I have most of the pieces in place to do so. However if not I wonder
> if there is
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:12:12AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:48:36PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 03:46:23PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:24:23PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:22:47PM -0
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:48:36PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 03:46:23PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:24:23PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:22:47PM -0800, Jesse Gross wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simon
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 03:46:23PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:24:23PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:22:47PM -0800, Jesse Gross wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:30AM -0800, B
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:24:23PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:22:47PM -0800, Jesse Gross wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:30AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:55PM +0900, Simon
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:22:47PM -0800, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:30AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:55PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> >> > as far as I can tell no one is actively worki
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:30AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:55PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
>> > as far as I can tell no one is actively working on the following item in
>> > OPENFLOW-1.1+. So I have made a star
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:30AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:55PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > as far as I can tell no one is actively working on the following item in
> > OPENFLOW-1.1+. So I have made a start it.
> >
> > * The new in_phy_port field in OFPT_PACK
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:09:55PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> as far as I can tell no one is actively working on the following item in
> OPENFLOW-1.1+. So I have made a start it.
>
> * The new in_phy_port field in OFPT_PACKET_IN needs some kind of
> implementation. It has a sensible i
13 matches
Mail list logo