Thanks for getting back to me.
It would be good to try both if at all possible. 2nd patch is probably
closer to what I plan to post for the 'net' tree.
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Flavio Leitner wrote:
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> I built a test package with your previous patch to Joe, but
> we need to
Hi Andy,
I built a test package with your previous patch to Joe, but
we need to schedule an appropriate time to test it, so it's
a bit slow on that front.
Having said that, which patch do you think is better to try first?
Thanks,
fbl
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 04:36:20PM -0700, Andy Zhou wrote:
>
Hi, Joe,
This is potentially a better fix that I'd like to propose for the
'net' tree. It would be great if you can test it in your set up to
see if it solved the issue you are facing with.
Thanks,
andy
diff --git a/datapath/actions.c b/datapath/actions.c
index c529bbb..208eb30 100644
--- a/dat
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Joe Talerico wrote:
> When using balance-tcp bonding with OVS we were seeing ARP issues when we
> reached ~ 100 guests. I Tracked as much as possible here :
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267291
>
> Has anyone seen this behavior before?
>
> Switchin
When using balance-tcp bonding with OVS we were seeing ARP issues when we
reached ~ 100 guests. I Tracked as much as possible here :
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267291
Has anyone seen this behavior before?
Switching to active/backup resolves the issue.
Thanks,
Joe
__
