From 6620f928738c745a050335e17bf8f7801f5500a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joe Stringer Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 11:20:29 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] FAQ: Mention hairpinning under actions=in_port. Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff --- FAQ | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/FAQ b/FAQ index a08d65c23..6c79efefb 100644 --- a/FAQ +++ b/FAQ @@ -1403,9 +1403,9 @@ A: Yes, OpenFlow requires a switch to ignore attempts to send a packet even be convenient, e.g. it is often the desired behavior in a flow that forwards a packet to several ports ("floods" the packet). - Sometimes one really needs to send a packet out its ingress port. - In this case, output to OFPP_IN_PORT, which in ovs-ofctl syntax is - expressed as just "in_port", e.g.: + Sometimes one really needs to send a packet out its ingress port + ("hairpin"). In this case, output to OFPP_IN_PORT, which in + ovs-ofctl syntax is expressed as just "in_port", e.g.: ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 in_port=2,actions=in_port -- 2.43.0