From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478DC1BA96 for ; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:42:19 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jun 2018 00:42:19 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,255,1526367600"; d="scan'208";a="65375231" Received: from grossi-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.252.9.106]) ([10.252.9.106]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Jun 2018 00:42:10 -0700 To: Nelio Laranjeiro , dev@dpdk.org, Adrien Mazarguil , Wenzhuo Lu , Jingjing Wu , Bernard Iremonger , Ori Kam , Stephen Hemminger References: From: Mohammad Abdul Awal Message-ID: <1abcbded-425c-c137-af00-7d8f17805cb9@intel.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 08:42:10 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/2] app/testpmd implement VXLAN/NVGRE Encap/Decap X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 07:42:20 -0000 Hi Nelio, On 21/06/2018 08:13, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote: > This series adds an easy and maintainable configuration version support for > those two actions for 18.08 by using global variables in testpmd to store the > necessary information for the tunnel encapsulation. Those variables are used > in conjunction of RTE_FLOW_ACTION_{VXLAN,NVGRE}_ENCAP action to create easily > the action for flows. > > A common way to use it: > > set vxlan ipv4 4 4 4 127.0.0.1 128.0.0.1 11:11:11:11:11:11 22:22:22:22:22:22 > flow create 0 ingress pattern end actions vxlan_encap / queue index 0 / end This way we can define only one tunnel for all the flows. This is not a convenient for testing a scenario (e.g. mutiport or switch) with multiple tunnels. Isn't it? Regards, Awal.