From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [GIT PULL v2] Open vSwitch Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:32:36 -0500 Message-ID: <1322494356.7338.75.camel@mojatatu> References: <20111123075433.GA7928@gondor.apana.org.au> <1322050976.2039.125.camel@mojatatu> <20111128130409.GB16828@gondor.apana.org.au> <1322488954.7338.66.camel@mojatatu> <4ED3A85A.1030003@nicira.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Herbert Xu , dev@openvswitch.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, David Miller To: Martin Casado Return-path: Received: from mail-yx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:41059 "EHLO mail-yx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750878Ab1K1Pcm (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:32:42 -0500 Received: by yenl6 with SMTP id l6so2966810yen.19 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 07:32:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4ED3A85A.1030003@nicira.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 07:27 -0800, Martin Casado wrote: > This is a common misunderstanding about OpenFlow. It does not require > the first packet of each flow to go to the controller. I am reading this to mean that the switch CPU will resolve things? Typically those tend to be tiny cpus. > In fact, no > production system I'm aware of does this. Generally OpenFlow-based > solutions targeted at large environments (e.g. data center, or WAN) > send only traditional control traffic to the controller (e.g. BGP or > OSPF), or none at all. Even OSPF or BGP would be problematic imo if the architecture doesnt allow prioritization of some form towards the controller. cheers, jamal