Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow setting flow-label in ingress packets #1183

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 14, 2018
Merged

Conversation

dpino
Copy link
Member

@dpino dpino commented Sep 20, 2018

In an infrastructure with several lwAFTRs if something goes wrong it may be hard to figure out which lwAFTR instance is causing trouble. Allowing each lwAFTR set their own flow-label can help to identify which ingress packets where processed by which lwAFTR.

@@ -723,6 +723,12 @@ module snabb-softwire-v2 {
"Maximum packet size to recieve on the IPv6 interface.";
}

leaf flow-label {
type uint32;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This defaults to 0 right? Is it worth putting in an explicit default: 0; clause here or is that unnecesary? (I noticed some other leaves have such defaults)

@dpino dpino merged commit 4b3e5ae into Igalia:lwaftr Oct 14, 2018
@dpino dpino deleted the ipv6-flow-label branch October 14, 2018 23:42
wingo added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2019
This commit makes four changes:

  (1) On the individual revision nodes in a schema, the revision date is
      now stored under `date` instead of `value`.

  (2) Schemas now have a `last_revision` property, indicating the date
      of the most recent revision.

  (3) This revision now gets serialized into compiled configurations.

  (4) When loading compiled configurations, we check that the compiled
      file's revision date corresponds to the what we are expecting.

Fixes #1183.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants