[P4-design] Example P4_14 and P4_16 programs for resubmit with 4 cases
Andy Fingerhut (jafinger)
jafinger at cisco.com
Mon Apr 15 11:27:28 EDT 2019
I have updated the example programs from what I sent out earlier, and added bullet point lists of what I consider to be the advantages and disadvantages of each approach.
The original P4_14 version is still there, and the 3 imagined P4_16 ones (each with different modifications to v1model) are all intended to behave exactly the same as the original P4_14 version, i.e. they all preserve only the user-defined metadata fields requested, and no others, and they all preserve only the values that the metadata fields have at the end of executing the ingress control, _not_ at the time the resubmit call is executed (the same as the P4_14 program does).
The document linked above also has a link to Mihai’s slides with his 3 different proposals, and explains how my example programs correspond to his proposals.
From: P4-design <p4-design-bounces at lists.p4.org> on behalf of "Andy Fingerhut (jafinger) via P4-design" <p4-design at lists.p4.org>
Reply-To: "Andy Fingerhut (jafinger)" <jafinger at cisco.com>
Date: Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 2:52 AM
To: Mihai Budiu via P4-design <p4-design at lists.p4.org>
Subject: [P4-design] Example P4_14 and P4_16 programs for resubmit with 4 cases
They are just toy programs, but the first P4_14 one and the fanciful, imagined, last P4_16 version should process packets identically, given a proper implementation of the imagined new language constructs used in that last version.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the P4-design