From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com (mail-ob0-f175.google.com [209.85.214.175]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6F46C626 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 18:42:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id ot10so1409786obb.2 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 09:42:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=commprove.com; s=google; h=from:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ZrVLRhXHr8vkGtG+IQOHVWqjU9NzGjcNGApgKiJXm30=; b=zZ0rFxTZta3TuFK7tHlAaAW/OvRjJqeZvfaXxlH+JQSr1ZK+z4TmhxAPlzyjx4sFVq BEc199UG+W2CO25UZpErN/GLpcPdqL//nF5bkpcr7LfdrztxbbUcwM5WXWcGhG60kB8A 1iX9tMPmiQMFbeMoRlvrRZsxDDOxct42wxr98= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZrVLRhXHr8vkGtG+IQOHVWqjU9NzGjcNGApgKiJXm30=; b=kTiNMccu+roPcZmpEg+oGR6Ovi0rUb/txXYF4ySciQIoJy8tPqSvK2BtqHjs2N+B2j O+oNER+wgGOwn0A92nBlojwYKaiS48NqD4pHLogU3OCcyy3qGUzoheoGnAqsdvwz5DfC Rqzt0/ELCg2LRybE3eS3/Ry8hHKVQ3P4cAarnlyv0F+6t9xmWG4LZYI3veiu/N4hm7eg +yjV8pSW5owRUSqTEQJnxt2br2H7/Qb3qMhVNjSXYsD4AN3HCCxEwGpTDec9Z/jhlvdL UEbx4qU5knW06nz9piSDMinOhxqBsLwrQhqlLQaZRPB84mzyn3W+Ht0GZ5+vcKD/fn5c f2aw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIpC4uKxx7ol/MVprsZoWRWYJILU9sY9Ne7lZLh+3DBuHMDJxQ6CTAMHMchKQ30hcP2iqeVvlv5Vzab9A== X-Received: by 10.202.94.214 with SMTP id s205mr12063990oib.34.1466008954151; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 09:42:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrea Bigagli Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) References: <3878315A-53FD-4721-B527-328FB5C2EFC6@commprove.com> <64D55C7D-F8E0-47A3-B032-DB9DFCFC307B@commprove.com> <-5504103702625557025@unknownmsgid> <90F6E924-6A82-4F11-A11A-370DB4FC2F98@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: <90F6E924-6A82-4F11-A11A-370DB4FC2F98@akamai.com> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 18:42:33 +0200 Message-ID: <8295293603497534094@unknownmsgid> To: "Pavey, Nicholas" Cc: "users@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Is it possible to TX through a port with no RX connected? X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:42:35 -0000 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 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=E2=80=99s extra cost, but perhaps it would allow you to make prog= ress. Regards, Nick *From: *Andrea Bigagli *Date: *Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 5:43 PM *To: *Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen *Cc: *"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 wrote: How many interface u got, if u got spare, u can work around