Search Mailing List Archives
[mininet-discuss] ovs-vswitchd support?
rlantz at cs.stanford.edu
Wed Oct 26 13:07:25 PDT 2011
Hmm, I like it!
Good things it preserves from mininet:
- use of python as configuration language (this is key)
- hosts as shells in network namespaces
Good things it adds:
- built-in native interfaces
- namespace support in pure-ish python (crafty! though I wonder how you pick the library)
- vswitchd support
- actual class for links
Using the multiprocessing module is interesting. I didn't use call() since it fails with large numbers of file descriptors.
One thing I'm puzzled by though: if you want to make it small, why use the Linux bridge at all? Open vSwitch replaces it, particularly with its bridge compatibility module.
It reminds me of my original implementation(s) of Mininet, which just had the basic functionality in about 200 lines of code. Perhaps we (Mininet devs) can think a bit about reorganizing ("refactoring") the code to make it more modular so that a minimal core of code can be used standalone (this is almost true at the moment because of the different API layers, but the code is intermixed in the actual files.)
Heheh, I agree the screen hack isn't ideal. If you can create an elegant replacement, I'd be interested. In theory, one should be able to simply use a unix domain socket, but I wasn't able to get that to work immediately when I tried it a while back.
I think we can improve the topology support in mininet; currently we have a couple of mechanisms to do the same thing, which may not be optimal.
On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:28 PM, Parantapa Bhattacharya wrote:
> I had tried to include ovs-vswitchd support in OVS some time back. But
> i found somthings in mininte that i disliked. So i cooked up a little
> version of my own which i called Piconet. Please check it if you like.
> Parantapa Bhattacharya
> mininet-discuss mailing list
> mininet-discuss at lists.stanford.edu
More information about the mininet-discuss