Currently, we assume that OpenFlow 1.3 set_field actions can contain
multiple header match fields (OXMs). According to specification, a
set_field action contains exactly one OXM, followed by padding to align
the action field in a OpenFlow message to 64 bits.
This diff changes how we handle OpenFlo
Hi,
These are the manpage updates to go with the port protection diffs for
switch(4).
Thanks,
Ayaka
Index: sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8,v
retrieving revision 1.334
diff -u -p -u -r1.334
Hi,
The following adds port protection support to switch(4). The behavior
copies that of bridge(4), where ports can be added to up to 31 protected
domains with a list of IDs using ifconfig(8):
# ifconfig switch0 protected pair1 1,2,..
Domain membership is checked for unicast, flooded (broadcast)
Hi all,
After a second thought, I've split off the diff for switchd.conf(5)
from the diffs for changing switchd(8)'s default listen port.
As suggested by kn@, it now notes the default listen port and address.
Comments/OKs?
Thanks,
Ayaka
Index: switchd.conf.5
==
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 10:52:59AM +0100, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 11:01:37PM -0800, Ayaka Koshibe wrote:
> > Currently, switchd(8) defaults to listening on port 6633, which was
> > the defacto port value used by OpenFlow. A decent chunk of OpenFlow
>
Hi all,
Currently, switchd(8) defaults to listening on port 6633, which was
the defacto port value used by OpenFlow. A decent chunk of OpenFlow
controllers have switched over to the IANA standardized OpenFlow port,
6653. While testing the change, I noticed that switchd(8) will listen on
random por
Hi all,
I've taken claudio@'s advice and restricted the pledge further. All of the
promises except stdio were for parsing args and opening sockets.
OK?
Thanks,
Ayaka
Index: switchctl.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/switchctl/sw
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 03:17:28PM -0700, Ayaka Koshibe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Currently, switchctl(8) is able to query a switch for information by
> specifying
> the switch's network address. The following adds support for querying a
> switch(4) instance via its control
Hi all,
Currently, switchctl(8) is able to query a switch for information by specifying
the switch's network address. The following adds support for querying a
switch(4) instance via its control device:
$ doas switchctl switch /dev/switch0 dump features
any > /dev/switch0: version 1_3 type FEATU
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 01:48:23PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 09:59:31AM +0200, Reyk Floeter wrote:
> > I already gave my OK for relayd but asked to adjust all proc.c instances.
>
> I have fixed relayd, httpd, vmd.
> akoshibe@ cares about switchd.
switchd is also now
Hi,
Mirroring bluhm's fixes for proc.c daemons to dup /dev/null for child
processes, for switchd(8).
OK?
Thanks,
Ayaka
Index: proc.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/switchd/proc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.13
diff -u -p -u -r1.13 pr
Hi,
This is a new version of a previous diff that I had for making switchd(8)
ignore PACKET_IN messages generated from looped traffic. Currently, it will
respond to the PACKET_IN with an invalid PACKET_OUT onto OFP*_PORT_ANY,
resulting in the switch responding with an error that makes switchd disc
Hi,
At BSDCan, someone reported that a sparc64 machine would panic if it was
receiving any traffic on a member interface of a switch(4) during reboot. We
got as far as getting this trace:
panic: trap type 0x34 (mem address not aligned): pc=15864ec
npc=15864f0 pstate=99820006
Stopped at db_en
Hi,
I noticed that if you try to move an immovable lo(4) to a nonexistent rdomain,
a new routing table will be created despite the operation failing with an
EPERM.
The following moves the rdomain/index check for lo(4) to before the creation
of a nonexisting target routing table.
OK?
Thanks,
Ay
On Sat, Aug 04, 2018 at 12:18:45PM +0100, Ricardo Mestre wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's another one for switchd(8) which removes cpath promise from pledge(2)
>
> OK?
This makes sense to me, and my usual tests worked without any issues.
ok akoshibe@
>
> Index: control.c
> ==
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:18:34AM -0700, Ayaka Koshibe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> switchd(8) sends packet_outs with OFP_PORT_ANY as the dstport, causing
> switches receiving them to disconnect due to validation failure of the said
> message. The comments indicate that looping packets sh
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:18:34AM -0700, Ayaka Koshibe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> switchd(8) sends packet_outs with OFP_PORT_ANY as the dstport, causing
> switches receiving them to disconnect due to validation failure of the said
> message. The comments indicate that looping packets sh
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:58:30AM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:20:35PM +0200, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> > ok
> >
>
> while doing it, can you move the tunneldomain options (both) to after
> tunneldf instead of before it (both in the mini synopsis and the list)?
> if n
Hi,
A while back I got a suggestion to add a '-tunneldomain' option as shorthand
for 'tunneldomain 0' to be consistent with '-rdomain'.
OK?
Thanks,
Ayaka
Index: ifconfig.8
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8,v
retrievin
Hi,
switchd(8) sends packet_outs with OFP_PORT_ANY as the dstport, causing
switches receiving them to disconnect due to validation failure of the said
message. The comments indicate that looping packets should be ignored, which I
agree is the expected behavior for a controller implementing a learn
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:54 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
>
>
>> On 22 Feb 2018, at 5:00 pm, Ayaka Koshibe wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 03:42:58PM +0100, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
>>> Ayaka Koshibe(akosh...@openbsd.org) on 2018.02.20 21:20:20 -0800:
>>&
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 03:42:58PM +0100, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> Ayaka Koshibe(akosh...@openbsd.org) on 2018.02.20 21:20:20 -0800:
> > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 4:48 AM, Reyk Floeter wrote:
> > >
> > >> Am 20.02.2018 um 11:15 schrieb Klemens Nanni :
> > >
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 5:08 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 05:09:58PM -0800, Ayaka Koshibe wrote:
>> Index: sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.c
>> ===
>> RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifcon
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 4:48 AM, Reyk Floeter wrote:
>
>> Am 20.02.2018 um 11:15 schrieb Klemens Nanni :
>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 05:09:58PM -0800, Ayaka Koshibe wrote:
>>> This diff would allow saying 'ifconfig foo -rdomain' instead of '
Hi,
This diff would allow saying 'ifconfig foo -rdomain' instead of 'ifconfig foo
rdomain 0'.
OK?
Thanks,
Ayaka
Index: sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8,v
retrieving revision 1.292
diff -u -
25 matches
Mail list logo