[Click] Your opinion on how to implement that ?

[Eddie Kohler]

Hi Harald!

Sorry for the delay here, and you may already have made your choice.  But of 
these, I think I would choose (c).  You could also do this without an extra 
element, by having an optional argument where one AggregateIPFlows would use 
another AggregateIPFlows to store its state.  This would probably lead to the 
minimal diff.

Also note that for (b) you wouldn't need to write new elements; in current 
Click both Paint and PaintSwitch take an optional ANNO argument that can be 
used to specify a different annotation.

Eddie


Harald Schiöberg wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hi,
> 
> you may remember MultiFlowDispatcher, which spawns one MultiFlowHandler
> per four-tupel flow based on IPFlowID of packets.
> 
> To make that more generic I want to use the AggregateAnno instead of the
> IPFlowID, which means you could use any Aggreate* Element in front of
> any MultiFlow Element to get as many Handlers as there are aggregates.
> 
> That leaves me with the problem of consistently tagging Packets with
> AggregateAnnos, even if there are multiple inputs or outputs of the
> configuration, yet the Aggregate* Elements have precisely one
> input-output pair (+ the error output)
> 
> I briefly thought about using Paint to tag all packets, then squeeze
> them through the same Aggregate Element, and using a paint-switch on the
> other side....
> but that makes very ugly configs, and at least the AggregateIPFlows
> overwrites the Paint field.
> 
> Remaining options
> a) Extend all Aggregate* Elements to have "1-/=+" processing.
> b) Introduce a Paint2 Anno, write Paint2() and PaintSwitch2()
> c) Write a IPFlowsState Element and have multiple AggregateIPFlows
> reference it
> 
> I don't like any of those....
> 
> 	Harald
> 
> 
> - --
> Harald Schiöberg
> Technische Universität Berlin | T-Laboratories | FG INET
> www: http://www.net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de
> Phone: +49-(0)30-8353-58476 | Fax: +49-(0)391 534 783 47
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFLYb1/y8wrZ9OvkU0RAp91AJ4n4Bm4ie80zhgXHg1li4hLLbGMhwCdEwOA
> bwMSKSXBdx/U0CUsLlugonc=
> =Laxq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> click mailing list
> click at amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
> https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click