netdev - Re: [GIT PULL v2] Open vSwitch

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 30 Nov 2011 08:23:05 -0500
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
Cc:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	dev@...nvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2] Open vSwitch

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 22:18 -0800, Jesse Gross wrote:
>  As Jamal alluded to above, it's
> actually the bridge code which is more conceptually similar. 

Either you misread what i said or i miscommunicated.
The exact similarity is in classifier action in the datapath.
The bridge, as i suggested, could have had at least two features
added to it in regards to learning to achieve what you wanted it to.
But as pointed out the bridge - which is a victim of combining policy
and mechanism in one spot - already has too many features. If we cleanly
separate out those things, then i dont see why we need two bridge
implementations.

Ok, so here's a digression:
I am uncomfortable with the fact i have to use ovs as the way to
configure things in a 48 port Gige switch. In Linux we have netdevs;
if you expose things as netdevs, for starters i can use standard
tools to do things to them. But this is a side discussion I started
with Justin - so you may have no pony in this race.

cheers,
jamal

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html