[ovs-discuss] OVC port MTU 1500 dhcp-options mtu 9000

2020-11-19 Thread Brendan Doyle
Folks, I'm trying to get OVN working in a 9000 MTU config so :  ovn-nbctl list dhcp-option _uuid   : 00f684c8-42bb-4fad-a248-f5697926778d cidr    : "10.225.1.0/24" external_ids    : {} options : {lease_time="3600", mtu="9000", router="10.225.1.1", server_

Re: [ovs-discuss] OVC port MTU 1500 dhcp-options mtu 9000

2020-11-19 Thread Brendan Doyle
So It works if I manually configure the br-int MTUs: #ovs-vsctl set interface vnet1 mtu_request=8900 #ovs-vsctl set interface vnet1 mtu=8900 #ovs-vsctl set interface vnet2 mtu_request=8900 #ovs-vsctl set interface vnet2 mtu=8900#ovs-vsctl get interface vnet2 mtu 8900 # ovs-vsctl get interface vne

[ovs-discuss] Way of handling rules at the OVS flow-table is there any time order?

2020-11-19 Thread Jordi Baranda
Dear OVSers, I am working in adding some restoration capabilities to my SDN controller app. I am in the design phase and I thinking of the implications of using break-before-make or make-before-break strategies. If I use break-before-make, there is no problem because I replace the rules and

Re: [ovs-discuss] OVC port MTU 1500 dhcp-options mtu 9000

2020-11-19 Thread Numan Siddique
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 4:48 PM Brendan Doyle wrote: > > So It works if I manually configure the br-int MTUs: > > #ovs-vsctl set interface vnet1 mtu_request=8900 > #ovs-vsctl set interface vnet1 mtu=8900 > #ovs-vsctl set interface vnet2 mtu_request=8900 > #ovs-vsctl set interface vnet2 mtu=8900#ov

[ovs-discuss] ovs-vswitchd with DPDK crashed when guest VM restarts network service

2020-11-19 Thread Alex Yeh (ayeh) via discuss
Hi, We are seeing a ovs-vswitchd service crash with segfault in the librte_vhost library when a DPDK application within a guest VM is stopped. We are using OVS 2.11.1 on CentOS 7.6 (3.10.0-1062 Linux kernel) with DPDK 18.11.2. We are using OVS-DPDK o

Re: [ovs-discuss] Way of handling rules at the OVS flow-table is there any time order?

2020-11-19 Thread Ben Pfaff
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 12:20:01PM +0100, Jordi Baranda wrote: > If I use break-before-make, there is no problem because I replace the rules > and that is. However for the make-before-break approach, I foresee that there > will be some flow rules with the same match fields but different action > fi