[WIP] Remove untested and unused support for IPv6 #227
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ccascone
commented
Apr 2, 2021
| @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ | |||
| #define MULTICAST_NEXT_TABLE_SIZE 1024 | |||
| #define EGRESS_VLAN_TABLE_SIZE 1024 | |||
| #define PORT_VLAN_TABLE_SIZE 1024 | |||
| #define STATS_TABLE_SIZE 1024 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't be here, remove.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
To reduce PHV utilization and make space for higher priority features.
None of the fabric-tna use cases requires IPv6 support and it's totally untested (we don't have PTF tests for it). If we really need it, we can likely come up with a more efficient design that reduces PHV utilization.
Let's use this PR to discuss implications, w.g., whether we should still support bridging for IPv6, and hence parse IPv6, reject, or accept as Ethernet/MPLS payload.
TODO