Hi all,
I'm having problem deleting the IP address of the interface.
I've already enabled tap-inject and I am not able to delete the ip address of
any interface neither locally on VPP cmd itself, nor remotely via corresponding
tap interface.
Is there anyone who has experienced the same issue?
-=
Hi All,
*Context*: Using dpdk + vpp for telecom network user plane processing
*Desired*: want to use dpdk crypto-dev scheduler to have 2 cores dedicated
for crypto operations
*Issue*: crypto devices of different types (AES_MB & AES_GCM) are not
supported concurrently.
*Query*: *Have anyone used cr
Hi Guys,
I have a question about ipsec policy in VPP. From my testing and deep
into the code, I found there's a no confliction detection and resolving in
current implementation for ipsec policy which means I could add two polices
with some overlap area with same priority. Should we add
Sure, that’s a good option. But, the point is that the stack won’t try to
figure out if the output interface is actually capable of honoring the
“offload” flag. Still need to think if this could be handled better.
Also, note that the stack handles segmentation itself, it does not offload
rx/tx
Am Mo., 29. Apr. 2019 um 18:21 Uhr schrieb Florin Coras <
fcoras.li...@gmail.com>:
> Unfortunately, as things stand, the tunnel should compute the checksum
> before encapsulating the traffic. Otherwise the output node won’t be able
> to find the right headers.
>
> Will look into simplifying this.
Unfortunately, as things stand, the tunnel should compute the checksum before
encapsulating the traffic. Otherwise the output node won’t be able to find the
right headers.
Will look into simplifying this.
Florin
> On Apr 29, 2019, at 8:18 AM, Andreas Schultz
> wrote:
>
> Thanks, that help
Thanks, that helped a lot. I found that traffic is not passing through the
node as I expected it.
The actual graph is
tcp4-output -> ip4-lookup -> ip4-rewrite -> upf-if-input
Note: upf-if-input is the node function of an interface. It is found
through a fib entry that look like this:
10.106.
Hi Andreas,
The tracing should work but because we’re reusing the syn packet to build the
syn-ack, it might not show correctly. Could you breakpoint the tcp4-output and
try to see if the trace code is hit?
As for the checksum, tcp only tags the packet with a request to have it
offloaded. If t
Try “pcap dispatch trace on max 1 buffer-trace
1000”, cause a transaction, “pcap dispatch trace off”; then look at the
resulting trace w/ a vpp-dispatch-trace enabled wireshark. See
https://fdio-vpp.readthedocs.io/en/latest/gettingstarted/developers/buildwireshark.html
HTH... Dave
From:
Hello VPP reviewers.
When adding a comment to API flag day document,
I have stumbled upon an idea,
that is somewhat larger than the document itself.
It has to do with a weaker form of VPP backward compatibility,
specific to clients using Python API (PAPI).
Here is the relevant part of the commen
Hi,
I'm trying to debug a problem and need to trace tcp4-output with vpp 19.04.
So far I have tried it with "trace add tcp4-output 100 verbose", but that
is not producing the expected result. The trace buffer is always empty.
I was expecting that "trace add af-packet-input 100" would also trace
Great job Dave!
Ray K
On 24/04/2019 23:06, Dave Wallace wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I am pleased to announce that the VPP 19.04 Release is complete and the
> release artifacts are available on PackageCloud:
> https://packagecloud.io/fdio/release
>
> Many thanks to all of the VPP & CSIT contributors and
12 matches
Mail list logo
