[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALnjE+rexP5B5Ofqwbtj_bmj-gABHORmV-DyoceGi7XV90d=EA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 13:17:42 -0700
From: Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/7] vxlan: Add vxlan_handler.
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Stephen Hemminger
<stephen@...workplumber.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 16:14:48 -0700
> Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com> wrote:
>
>> vxlan and openvswitch modules needs to share port. Following
>> patch breaks down vxlan per port abstraction in two component.
>> So now vxlan_sock is broken into struct vxlan_sock handles socket
>> and vxlan_handler which handler for user of vxlan protocol.
>>
>> Next commit will extend vxlan_handler for openvswitch.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>
>
> Not sure why the added complexity here is needed.
>
> Since the are separate services, why not run them on separate
> UDP ports. Otherwise unless the kernel and the Openvswitch
> controller share state (which would be really hard given that
> OVS controller is in user space), the chance of overlapping
> configuration seems like a trap.
>
> There is already a lot of layering in VXLAN between the
> device, forwarding table, VNI, and multiple UDP sockets.
> Doing this needs more thought or persuasive use cases.
I agree sharing state between kernel-vxlan and ovs-vxlan does not
makes much sense. I will rework patches without vxlan-udp-port sharing
which will eliminate that possibility entirely.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists