<html><body><p><tt>"discuss" <discuss-bounces@openvswitch.org> wrote on 06/14/2016 10:31:40 PM:<br><br>> From: John McDowall <jmcdowall@paloaltonetworks.com></tt><br><tt>> To: Na Zhu <nazhu@cn.ibm.com></tt><br><tt>> Cc: Srilatha Tangirala/San Francisco/IBM@IBMUS, "OpenStack <br>> Development Mailing List \(not for usage questions\)" <openstack-<br>> dev@lists.openstack.org>, discuss <discuss@openvswitch.org></tt><br><tt>> Date: 06/14/2016 10:48 PM</tt><br><tt>> Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [openstack-dev] [OVN] [networking-ovn] <br>> [networking-sfc] SFC andOVN</tt><br><tt>> Sent by: "discuss" <discuss-bounces@openvswitch.org></tt><br><tt>> <br>> Juno,</tt><br><tt>> <br>> It is a container for port-pair-groups and flow-classifier. I <br>> imagine there could be more the than one port-chain per switch. Also<br>> we may want to extend the model beyond a single lswitch </tt><br><br><tt>I agree that there could be more than one port-chain per switch, determined</tt><br><tt>by the flow classifier. </tt><br><br><tt>What I'm confused by is:</tt><br><br><tt>1. Why are items only recorded in logical switches? I would think</tt><br><tt>that I could also attach an SFC to a logical router - although I admit</tt><br><tt>that the current neutron model for ports doesn't really allow that</tt><br><tt>easily. Couple that with the change of name from Logical_Port to</tt><br><tt>Logical_Switch_Port, and I'm left wondering if we aren't better off</tt><br><tt>with the following "weak" links instead: </tt><br><tt>-the Port_Chain includes the logical switch as an external_id</tt><br><tt>-each Port_Pair_Group includes the Port_Chain as an external_id</tt><br><tt>-each Port_Pair includes the PPG as an external_id</tt><br><tt>-each Logical_Switch_Port includes the PP as an external_id</tt><br><br><tt>I *think* that *might* allow me (in the future) to attach a port chain</tt><br><tt>to a logical router by setting the logical router as an external_id and</tt><br><tt>using Logical_Router_Ports to make up the PPs...</tt><br><br><br><tt>2. I still don't see what Logical_Flow_Classifier is buying me that</tt><br><tt>ACL doesn't - I can codify all of the classifiers given in the match</tt><br><tt>criteria of an ACL entry and codify the first PPG of the SFC as</tt><br><tt>the action of the ACL entry...</tt><br><br><tt>Ryan</tt><BR>
</body></html>