arbitrarymask.PNG
|
Blocks |
|||
| is blocked by |
|
Yang type dotted-quad Addition requir... | Resolved |
[OPNFLWPLUG-608] Adding support for L3 address arbitraty mask for Ipv4 Created: 28/Jan/16 Updated: 27/Sep/21 Resolved: 11/Mar/16 |
|
| Status: | Resolved |
| Project: | OpenFlowPlugin |
| Component/s: | General |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Bug | ||
| Reporter: | Sai MarapaReddy | Assignee: | Unassigned |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Environment: |
Operating System: All |
||
| Attachments: |
arbitrarymask.PNG
|
||||||||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||
| External issue ID: | 5119 | ||||||||
| Description |
|
Openflowplugin currently supports only subnet masking (CIDR). It does not support Arbitrary subnet masking for L3 Source and Destination IP Address for flow match. Example of usage of subnet mask when pushing a flow which works is as follows E.g <ipv4-destination>200.200.200.10/24</ipv4-destination> Example of usage of arbitrary subnet mask when pushing a flow which does not work is as follows E.g <ipv4-destination>200.200.200.10/255.255.240.0</ipv4-destination> throws rest conf validation error, because current ietf-inet-types model don't support arbitrary mask. I have a attached a file with this bug which shows the error message when we add a flow using arbitrary bit mask. Arbitrary mask was introduced in the latest revision of ietf-yang-types (typedef dotted-quad) and that is something can be leveraged to support this addition. With its introduction, we can use both subnet mask and arbitrary bit mask. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 28/Jan/16 ] |
|
Attachment arbitrarymask.PNG has been added with description: Arbitrary bit mask error |
| Comment by Ioannis Schistos [ 29/Jan/16 ] |
|
I have seen that "bug" and for personal reasons I wanted arbitrary mask match to work.I implemented it locally and it is working fine.The thing is, I implemented it for ipv6 source and destination, but the idea is the same.I am new to this, so I have to contribute my solution. |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 29/Jan/16 ] |
|
Ioannis Schistos :- Please let me know if you need any help in pushing your existing solution. |
| Comment by Ioannis Schistos [ 12/Feb/16 ] |
|
Hey, the thing is have implemented as I told you for ipv6 by stating my own typedef because I had not seen the new yangs.Now I go on the newly revisioned ones and I cannot understand how the ipv4 prefix is different from the old one(or the ipv6 prefix) .If you could help me with that, I could understand the point where it differs and I would be able to integrate my implementation. |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 12/Feb/16 ] |
|
Hi Ioannis, We need Dotted-quad notation for ipv4-arbitrary-bit-mask. This is avaialble in new yang model ietf-yang-types revision 20130715. From implementation point of view - I completed the code and pushed to drafts where i just added you as a reviewer. Will publish sooner. Waiting for last minute changes. Please let me know if you need any further information. |
| Comment by Ioannis Schistos [ 15/Feb/16 ] |
|
(In reply to Sai MarapaReddy from comment #4) Ok. I am implementing ipv6-arbitrary match though.But ok. |
| Comment by Ioannis Schistos [ 15/Feb/16 ] |
|
Should I go ahead and implement ipv6 with a pattern of my own? |
| Comment by Ioannis Schistos [ 15/Feb/16 ] |
|
Should I go ahead and implement ipv6 with a pattern of my own? |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 15/Feb/16 ] |
|
I am not working on IPv6 part. Please feel free to implement. |
| Comment by Ioannis Schistos [ 16/Feb/16 ] |
|
Ok, I will go ahead and implement it.Could I make you a reviewer? |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 16/Feb/16 ] |
|
Sure. But Please add one of the Committers as a reviewer too. |
| Comment by Ioannis Schistos [ 17/Feb/16 ] |
|
I will be the commiter. |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 17/Feb/16 ] |
|
Committer as defined here - https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_OpenFlow_Plugin:Main Only committers can merge if i am not wrong. |
| Comment by Ioannis Schistos [ 18/Feb/16 ] |
|
Oh ok.I get it now, thank you. Could from my solution refer to this bug(since this bug mentions L3 not only ipv4)?But still mentioning that my solution implements ipv6. |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 18/Feb/16 ] |
|
(In reply to Ioannis Schistos from comment #13) I would change the description of bug. Please open another if possible, so that we can merge separately. |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 11/Mar/16 ] |
|
Patch committed - https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/35223/ |
| Comment by Sai MarapaReddy [ 11/Mar/16 ] |
|
Patch committed - https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/35223/ |