You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 27, 2018. It is now read-only.
we have found this issue. When writing a policy like match1 >> (match2 >> fwd), two rules are created instead of one:
The first one, with higher priority, is the expected one.
The second one is the rule match1 >> drop.
For instance, with match1 selecting all TCP packets and match2 selecting only the ones with dstip equal to 10.0.3.100 on a certain switch we write in Pyretic:
The difference wrt our case is that the two created matches for issue #28 are equal, so the proposed patch eliminating duplicated rules works. In our case, however, it would not work.
Thank you in advance,
Giovanni
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Hi all,
we have found this issue. When writing a policy like match1 >> (match2 >> fwd), two rules are created instead of one:
For instance, with match1 selecting all TCP packets and match2 selecting only the ones with dstip equal to 10.0.3.100 on a certain switch we write in Pyretic:
self.policy = (match(ethtype=2048,protocol=packet.TCP_PROTO) >> (match(switch=203178705145866,dstip='10.0.3.100') >> fwd(10)))
we get the following OF flow rules (the created rules are marked with **):
I don't know if this can help, but we found a previous similar issue:
#28
The difference wrt our case is that the two created matches for issue #28 are equal, so the proposed patch eliminating duplicated rules works. In our case, however, it would not work.
Thank you in advance,
Giovanni
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: