Re: [dpdk-users] Is it possible to TX through a port with no RX connected?

[Andrea Bigagli <andrea.bigagli@commprove.com>]

I'm currently evaluating this possibility as it appears there's no
dpdk-only-based solution.

Unfortunately the budget is really tight and the customer is really against
adding any extra piece of metal in its premises, even if it's on the
monitoring path...

Thanks anyway for the suggestion


Il giorno 15 giu 2016, alle ore 14:56, Pavey, Nicholas <npavey@akamai.com>
ha scritto:

Hi Andrea,



Would it be possible to pass the incoming (tapped) traffic through a switch?



Perhaps that might allow the interfaces between the system being tapped and
the switch to go down, while leaving the interfaces between the switch and
the DPDK machine up? The switch would deal with the intermittent link-down
conditions, without taking down the links to the DPDK and therefore not
taking down your DPDK TX links too.



I know it’s extra cost, but perhaps it would allow you to make progress.



Regards,





Nick









*From: *Andrea Bigagli <andrea.bigagli@commprove.com>
*Date: *Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 5:43 PM
*To: *Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen <zain2294@gmail.com>
*Cc: *"users@dpdk.org" <users@dpdk.org>
*Subject: *Re: [dpdk-users] Is it possible to TX through a port with no RX
connected?



Nope.

I've got 4 dual port boards, and have to handle 8 RX. But I'm curious as

what the workaround would be?





On 14 giu 2016, at 23:39, Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen <zain2294@gmail.com>

wrote:



How many interface u got, if u got spare, u can work around