Hi Jeff,
It was not intentional. The commit you mentioned was addressing tunnel
implementations in VPP which uses similar encap/decap approach with
vnet/src/vxlan as the model or “template”. L2TP uses different encap/decap
approach so was not included.
With respect to the dummy tx function, I do see it used in L2TP
VNET_DEVICE_CLASS init for l2tpv3_device_class:
VNET_DEVICE_CLASS (l2tpv3_device_class,static) = {
.name = "L2TPv3",
.format_device_name = format_l2tpv3_name,
.name_renumber = l2tpv3_name_renumber,
.tx_function = dummy_interface_tx,
};
That line specifying tx_function should be removed to avoid scalability issues.
If large number of L2TP tunnels are created, this line would cause multiple
instances of the dummy_terface_tx nodes to be created, one per tunnel, even
though these nodes will never be used.
Thanks for noticing this. Please feel free to submit a patch to address it.
Regards,
John
From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> On Behalf Of Jeff
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 12:59 PM
To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
Subject: [vpp-dev] L2TP dummy tx
Regarding this commit:
https://git.fd.io/vpp/commit/?id=e5453d0fa29f39a7f78a7e22815566a7f4c9e5ef
I noticed that L2TP still has its dummy interface tx function and is not
mentioned in the commit message. Wanted to check if this was intentional or
not.
Thanks,
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#10840): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/10840
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27371304/21656
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
