[P4-dev] Reg: Suggestion on P4 implementation

Mohan Krishna mohankrishna290787 at gmail.com
Wed Jun 22 08:09:26 EDT 2016


I apologize, I should have been more specific.

GTP-U has a bit and if this bit is set, a optional field is present.  It
does not have type and length field present.
I am trying to implement GTP-U using P4. If this has to be done, can
someone suggest, how it could be done.

This is for academic purpose, hence any idea on how it could be done
now/future could be helpful.


On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Mohan Krishna <mohankrishna290787 at gmail.com
> wrote:

> Hi,
> I am trying to find the feasibility of implementing GTP-U tunneling
> Protocol using P4. The header has a message length, followed by extension
> headers which are optional. The extension headers are identified using the
> next extension header field(Not TLV type).
> I did not understand how this could be implemented using P4. Please let me
> know your suggestions regarding the implementation of the same.
> +Bits 0-78-2324-31
> 0 Message length Contents
> ... ...
> ... Contents Next extension header
> Regards,
> Mohan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.p4.org/pipermail/p4-dev_lists.p4.org/attachments/20160622/78113659/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the P4-dev mailing list