On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jiri Benc <jb...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, 4 Dec 2015 08:43:59 -0800, Tom Herbert wrote: >> What a mess VXLAN has become. There are no guidelines or order in >> defining these reserved bits! If anyone is looking to do some work in >> encapsulation please consider bringing up VXLAN-GPE/NSH in the stack, >> hopefully that world will be better.... > > I'm actually working right now on VXLAN-GPE implementation (and tons of > cleanups in the vxlan code) which is the reason I noticed this bug. > That's awesome! One favor, can you make sure VXLAN-GPE works with IPv6 from the start. :-)
Also, I'll need to spin an I-D for RCO in VXLAN-GPE. Do you see any reason to use a different bit for it? Tom >> Acked-by: Tom Herbert <t...@herbertland.com> > > Thanks. David, as this was submitted as RFC, should I resubmit? > Provided that you're okay with the patch, of course; it changes the > on-wire format which should not be taken lightly, even though the > current behavior is incorrect. > > Jiri > > -- > Jiri Benc -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
