taken.Can you please suggest some way to fix it.
Regards,
Ananthan
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:25:50PM +0530, ananthan wrote:
> > For some guest there is packet loss,can this be because of this drop
> action
> > in eth0, its
.
regards,
ananth
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 07:27:59PM +0530, ananthan wrote:
> > But Why there are flows for in_port(2) when bonding shows active-backup?
>
> OVS can't control what packets come in on an interface.
>
>
Hi,
i have ovs bond bond0 with eth0 and eth1 connected to it
*ovs-appctl bond/list*
bond type slaves
bond0 active-backup eth0, eth1
*ovs-appctl bond/show bond0*
bond_mode: active-backup
bond-hash-basis: 0
updelay: 31000 ms
downdelay: 200 ms
lacp_negotiated: false
slave eth0: enabled
may_ena
xpect. Help!
>
> try some of the debugging tips there and include the output. It
> looked like your traffic would be dropped if you didn't have a VLAN.
>
> -Reid
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:08 PM, ananthan wrote:
>
>> *I have vm connected to linux bridge
*I have vm connected to linux bridge which is then connected to ovs bridge
using veth pairs *qvocb9f0e52-99(ovs end) and qvbcb9f0e52-99 (native bridge
end)
*
*
qvocb9f0e52-99 is then connected to br-int .*
*
br-int has one of the veth pair connected ie int-br-eth0 and other end
phy-br-eth0 to br-e
I dont think "iptables -m physdev vif" can work with ovs,but in openstack i
think they made it to work by attaching virtual interface to Linux bridge
and then to ovs bridge,may be some one can explain it better.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 2:45 PM, kevin parker wrote:
> Hi,
>Is there any
onfiguration. Since you are just doing normal switching that matches on
> L2 addresses, most of the fields are now wildcarded and these megaflows are
> covering the bulk of your traffic.
>
> --Justin
>
>
> On Sep 30, 2013, at 10:18 PM, ananthan wrote:
>
> > Hi,
&g
things.
Regards,
Ananthan
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Justin Pettit wrote:
>
> On May 28, 2013, at 8:39 AM, ananthan wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > this is the only output for
> >
> > ovs-ofctl dump-flows xapi3
> >
> > duration=5120780.01
Hi,
One of our xenserver 6.1 running
ovs-vsctl (Open vSwitch) 1.4.2
Compiled Nov 23 2012 12:41:37
was showing NFS related error as it was not able to communicate with NFS.
in kernel.log it was showing stack trace with ovs pid in stack.
Can some one tell me does this stack trace show any i
Thanking you,
Ananthan
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Justin Pettit wrote:
> You can think of the datapath flow table as a cache of recently used
> flows. Usually, ovs-vswitchd will keep a flow in the datapath for five
> seconds, but it may eject the flow sooner. Under certain circ
you want clear answers, then you have to ask questions clearly.
> As-is, I have to guess what you are really asking.
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:23:45AM +0530, ananthan wrote:
> > thanks for your quick reply,but my ping didnt get dropped even though
> > latency was varying
&
thanks for your quick reply,but my ping didnt get dropped even though
latency was varying
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:20:20AM +0530, ananthan wrote:
> > Could you please confirm this also.If there is no
> > cor
data path, control path
has to regenerate one,in this case there is no flow for +_10 seconds so how
can packets flow in this 10 seconds.
Regards,
Ananthan
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 02:31:58PM +0530, ananthan wrote:
> >i am
until i stopped ping*.*
*
*
Using OVS 1.4.1 cpu ~81% at the time of flow expiry
Regards,
Ananthan
___
discuss mailing list
discuss@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Thanks Justin,it worked,but doesn't it create mesh topology,is there any
way we can do it in a better way like star topology or similar.So that i
can easily add 50+ hosts with out creating 49 endpoints.
once again thank for your help.
ananthan
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Justin P
ks like it has accepted both ips and i can see that in *ovs-vsctl show
* but i lost private connectivity between all hosts tunnel,now there is no
working tunnel.Can some one tell me the proper way to add more than two
hosts.
Regards,
Ananthan
___
discuss ma
/forwarding L2 switch.
Does this point has any part in high cpu usage?
Regards,
ananth
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:56 PM, Justin Pettit wrote:
> On May 27, 2013, at 10:21 AM, ananthan wrote:
>
> > Thanks Justin,
> > I have seen a thread regarding changing flow-eviction-threshold
.
Thanks,
Ananthan
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:35 PM, Justin Pettit wrote:
> On May 27, 2013, at 9:58 AM, ananthan wrote:
>
> > is it possible to increase the buffer,if we have lot of free ram
>
> No. And that's probably not a great idea, since it will introduce lots o
is it possible to increase the buffer,if we have lot of free ram
thanks,
Ananthan
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Justin Pettit wrote:
> On May 27, 2013, at 9:29 AM, ananthan wrote:
>
> > Thanks for your reply, Can you please clarify this,does lost indicate
> packet drop?
lows in the kernel, which should substantially
> improve flow set up performance.
>
> --Justin
>
>
> On May 27, 2013, at 6:52 AM, ananthan wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >I am having high traffic vms running on Xenserver 6.0.2 with some vms
> using more than 11mbps which inc
Hi,
I am having high traffic vms running on Xenserver 6.0.2 with some vms
using more than 11mbps which include public and private traffic.
And because of this high traffic vms i am not able to run more than 2 vms
on single host as ovs-vswitchd struggles to process packet resulting in
heavy packe
Gross wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 8:40 AM, ananthan
> wrote:
> >
> > Could you tell me how can this flow work with out nw_dstand dl_dst?
> >
> >
> 1.priority=400,arp,in_port=2,dl_src=6a:3b:ad:97:c9:8a,nw_src=5.x.x.12,arp_sha=6a:3b:ad:97:c9:8a
> > a
required for connection to takes
place.Whats the difference here.,
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:25 PM, ananthan
> wrote:
> > Thanks for your reply,but now things are more complicated,please go
> through
> > this,i have also
the flow. This is enough to prevent traffic
from flowing but my guess is that when you added the input port
constraint it was for traffic originating in the other direction. As a
result, nothing was blocked
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 4:23 AM, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:
tion
worked no other things worked.And to make situation worse traffic to vm
worked with out rules priority 304 and 303.how can an additional *in_port
*make this much difference.Can some one please explain the problem.
Also When i added "priority=299,in_port=3 actions=drop&quo
25 matches
Mail list logo
