Hello Everyone!
I've encountered an issue with deleting route to 0.0.0.0/0 via some virtual
interface: vpp crashed with a SIGABRT. This issue can be reproduced with gre
interface on the current master 1c6486f7b8a00a1358d5c8f4ea1d874073bbcd6c:
```
DBGvpp# ip table add 10
DBGvpp# create gre tunne
Thanks Benoit! I will try the above mentioned steps.
I am not sure why it works fine with 2Rx and 2Tx queue configuration
GigabitEthernet13/0/0 1 up GigabitEthernet13/0/0
Link speed: 10 Gbps
Ethernet address 00:50:56:9b:f5:c5
VMware VMXNET3
carrier up full duplex mt
From: on behalf of "rya...@yunify.com"
Date: Tuesday 14 January 2020 at 14:07
To: "vpp-dev@lists.fd.io"
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] #vapi -- Need multiple times " ip table del xxx" to
delete a specific 'ip table' within vpp?
Hi Neale,
Thanks for answer.
Another question:
If I remove the l3 inter
Hi Neale,
Thanks for answer.
Another question:
If I remove the l3 interface directly, the num in " locks:[src:CLI:6, ]"
*won't* decrease.
If I remove the l3 interface from vrf, the num in " locks:[src:CLI:6, ]"
*will* decrease. Does this imply the correct api sequence should be "removing
from
Hi Ryan,
It’s probably a sign that you have bound multiple interfaces to that table :
set int ip table
And you need to unbind them (or bind them back to the default table) all before
deleting the table :
set int ip table 0
regards,
neale
From: on behalf of "rya...@yunify.com"
Date: Mo
Hi Benoit,
Thanks for your prompt response.
We are migrating from vpp 18.01 to vpp.19.08 , that's why we want least
modification in our build system and we want to use DPDK as we were using
earlier
.
DBGvpp# show log
2020/01/13 14:44:42:014 notice dhcp/clientplugin initialized
2020/01/13
Thanks a lot
Ahmed
From: Matthew Smith
Date: Monday, January 13, 2020 at 8:20 AM
To: "Jerome Tollet (jtollet)"
Cc: Ahmed Bashandy , vpp-dev
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VPP support for VRRP
Netgate has a plugin which adds VRRPv3 support to VPP. We plan to submit it in
gerrit in the next month or
Netgate has a plugin which adds VRRPv3 support to VPP. We plan to submit it
in gerrit in the next month or two.
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 4:27 AM Jerome Tollet via Lists.Fd.Io wrote:
>
> Of course, contributions are more than welcome in case you’d like to work
> on VRRP for VPP.
>
>
>
Netgate has
Hmm,
- I suppose you run VPP as root and not in a container
- if you use CentOS/RHEL can you check disabling SELinux ('setenforce 0')
- can you share the output of Linux dmesg and VPP 'show pci'
Best
ben
> -Original Message-
> From: chetan bhasin
> Sent: lundi 13 janvier 2020 15:51
>
Coverity run failed today.
Current number of outstanding issues are 2
Newly detected: 0
Eliminated: 0
More details can be found at
https://scan.coverity.com/projects/fd-io-vpp/view_defects
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#15147): ht
Hi Chetan,
Any reason for not using VPP built-in vmxnet3 driver instead of DPDK? That
should give you better performance and would be easier for us to debug. See
https://docs.fd.io/vpp/20.01/d2/d1a/vmxnet3_doc.html
Otherwise, can you share 'show logging' output?
Ben
> -Original Message---
Hello Everyone,
I am facing an issue while bringing up vpp with *less than 2 rx and 2 tx
queue*. I am using vpp19.08. I have configured pci's under the dpdk section
like below -
1)
dpdk {
# dpdk-config
dev default {
num-rx-desc 1024
num-rx-queues 1
num-tx-desc 1024
num-tx-queues 1
# vlan-str
Aleksander,
> Sorry, you are absolutely right. It's no issues here. In my VPP v19.08-stable
> I have no commit 75761b93.
Thanks, that was good to hear!
Best regards,
Ole
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#15144): https://lists.fd.io
Sorry, you are absolutely right. It's no issues here. In my VPP v19.08-stable I
have no commit 75761b93.
Thanks!
Aleksander
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#15143): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/15143
Mute This Topic: https://
Hi Aleksander,
> Yes. This fix still needed. Please take a look at the test below:
>
> > import ipaddress
> > ipaddress.IPv4Network((u'192.168.0.222', 24), False)
> IPv4Network(u'192.168.0.0/24')
>
> The IPv4Network method should not be used here, because in functions like an
> ip_address_dump
Yes. This fix still needed. Please take a look at the test below:
> import ipaddress
> ipaddress.IPv4Network(( u'192.168.0.222' , 24 ), False )
IPv4Network(u'192.168.0.0/24')
The IPv4Network method should not be used here, because in functions like an
ip_address_dump or ip_route_dump we expect t
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 01:20 PM, Ole Troan wrote:
>
> would you mind elaborating why you want the Python representation of an IP
> prefix to be a dictionary of address and length as opposed to an
> IPv6Network/IPv4Network object?
Hi Ole!
Thanks! It's strange, but the IPv[46]Network method some
Hi guys ，
I have a question when I delete 'ip table'/'vrf' within VPP.
It need issue multiple times " ip table del xxx" to delete a specific 'ip
table' within vpp.
The number decided by num in " locks:[src:CLI:6, ]"
For example, with follow 'ip table'/'vrf', I need issue " ip table del 4114532
Hello Ahmed,
The presentation you are referring to is about networking-vpp (OpenStack
driver). It’s not about VPP in itself.
* Networking-vpp supports HA mode with VRRP for VPP using keepalived
* We currently have no plan to add support for VRRP
Of course, contributions are more than wel
Hi Aleksander,
> 3) vpp_papi: correct unformat ip address for ip_address_dump, ip_route_dump,
> etc (unformat-api-prefix.patch)
would you mind elaborating why you want the Python representation of an IP
prefix to be a dictionary of address and length as opposed to an
IPv6Network/IPv4Network ob
Hello Everyone,
I have a small set of the fixes for VPP, but unfortunatelly right now, I have
no time for pushing the code with git review.
I hope that these fixes are very useful for the project and I would be very
happy if someone could do it instead of me.
In any case I hope that these fixes
Hi
Slide 34 in the presentation
https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/m/en_us/service-provider/ciscoknowledgenetwork/files/0531-techad-ckn.pptx
says “support for HA (VRRP based)“
But when I searched the mailing I found
https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/12862?p=,,,20,0,0,0::relevance,,vrrp,20,2,0,31351
22 matches
Mail list logo
