Revised the dataplane to introduce "access" & "core" #114
Conversation
pfcpiface/pfcpiface.go
Outdated
| @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ type sessRecord struct { | |||
|
|
|||
| var sessions map[uint64]sessRecord | |||
|
|
|||
| func pfcpifaceMainLoop(upf *upf, n3ip string, sourceIP string) { | |||
| func pfcpifaceMainLoop(upf *upf, accessip string, sourceIP string) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
other places too. Also do we have to advertise our coreIP as well during association setup so that SMF knows for N9 interfacing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's talk about the N9 interface soon.
ajamshed
force-pushed
the
topics/rename_modules
branch
2 times, most recently
from
922d774 to
55ff5e1
Compare
| except KeyError: | ||
| self.s1u_ifname = "s1u" | ||
| self.sgi_ifname = "sgi" | ||
| print('Can\'t parse interface name(s)! Setting it to default values ({}, {})'.format("s1u", "sgi")) | ||
| self.access_ifname = "access" | ||
| self.core_ifname = "core" | ||
| print('Can\'t parse interface name(s)! Setting it to default values ({}, {})'.format("access", "core")) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I hope this behavior is consistent across the other two controllers as well
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should work fine. I tested it with sim mode as well. It is working fine. Zmq-based controller should work fine as well. I tested it with Spirent.
|
@ajamshed can you rebase, squash and force push a single commit. |
... to access-, core- respectively. Also updated the README file. Signed-off-by: Muhammad Asim Jamshed <[email protected]>
ajamshed
force-pushed
the
topics/rename_modules
branch
from
7414db9 to
378f5e7
Compare
IIUC testing this patch needs some change in helm-charts repo? If so can anyone submit a helm chart patch which I can download for testing this patch? |
|
retest this please |
5 similar comments
|
retest this please |
|
retest this please |
|
retest this please |
|
retest this please |
|
retest this please |
Updated both pfcpiface and zmq-cpiface controllers.