Hi all, we are working on getting more videos out there to assist folks getting started. Here was one we recorded today with OVSDBs resident controller all-star Madhu. The resolution is up to 720p so

FYI: For all those who tried this, I should have mentioned this is currently work in progress. The intent below is to show all the Neutron APIs being handled by the ODL NeutronAPIService. There is

Hi kyle, Thank you for sharing this information! I checked out the devstack tree from here. git clonehttps://github.com/CiscoSystems/devstack.git And, setup my local.conf and run

Hi Hideyuki: Is this a fresh Ubuntu/Fedora box? Do you have a firewall enabled? Looks like your credentials are wrong. Make sure you have updated the IP addresses in the localrc file before running

Unfortunately, I couldn't attend the last TSC call where the issue of conflicting services in the virtualization edition was discussed further. But in reading Dave's notes, it seems there was some

Hi folks, Just started writing system test plan for OVSDB and I found one issue, one possible improvement and one general question. 1) Lets starts with the issue: with a controller with 2 IP

Hi Luis, Thanks so much for the feedback, this is really awesome! I threw in some thoughts, Im sure the others have additional input due to their better knowledge of the core controller but here are

Hi Brent, Thanks for your quick answer. I will try the examples from Postman and let you know. For the question about which controller IP should be configured in the OVS bridge, I still think

Hi Luis, Exactly. The correct solution is to identify the appropriate Controller-ip-address to set based on the reachability information towards the switch via OVSDB. And as Brent

Anees, I have to disagree with you on the need for the Affinity Service to touch the network. Yes, we do not need yet another virtualization implementation, but this is not about virtualization is

Resending with a link instead of an attachment ---- Anees, I have to disagree with you on the need for the Affinity Service to touch the network. Yes, we do not need yet another virtualization

Benny, your last sentence is what I am getting at -- so I don't think there is any disagreement. I'm not arguing that we don't need network abstractions separate from network virtualization. And I

Anees, In that case I remove my disagreement, however from our point of view it is the affinity service that is providing the abstraction and the enforcement, whether affinity touches the network

OK, thanks to the Postman examples I have the system test nailed down with the steps below: - Configure mininet in passive mode (sudo ovs-vsctl set-manager ptcp:6640) - Start mininet with

Excellent. Thanks Luis. Thanks, Madhu On 11/25/13, 1:02 PM, Luis Gomez wrote:

Luis, you are the man buddy. We will get you more docs and functions in coming days sir. Thanks, -Brent From: Madhu Venugopal <mavenugo@...> Date: Monday, November 25, 2013 5:43 PM To: Luis Gomez

Actually I was too fast on the test cases, the ping after replacing one switch by another does not work but I think it is an issue in simple forwarding app. Have you also seen this behavior?

Sorry again, it does actually work, I just remembered the patches have to be bidirectional! From: integration-dev-bounces@... [mailto:integration-dev-bounces@...]On Behalf Of Luis Gomez Sent:

Hi Brent, here is the collection I created for system test: https://www.getpostman.com/collections/cb05d301b45c5b8a0554 BR/Luis From: Brent Salisbury [mailto:brent.salisbury@...] Sent:

That’s awesome, thanks Luis. We were thinking about keeping a running collection in a directory in the project so this is much appreciated. Thanks, -Brent From: Luis Gomez <luis.gomez@...> Date: