[pox-dev] POX - TCP redirection flows

[Murphy McCauley]

On May 19, 2013, at 2:57 AM, chenli wrote:

> Thanks again for your kindly clarifying.
> 
> But sometimes I got error message when I delete flows from controller using the OFPFC_DELETE in ofp_flow_mod object like below:
> 
> Exception while handling Connection!PacketIn...
> 
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/revent/revent.py", line 233, in raiseEventNoErrors
>     return self.raiseEvent(event, *args, **kw)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/revent/revent.py", line 280, in raiseEvent
>     rv = event._invoke(handler, *args, **kw)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/revent/revent.py", line 158, in _invoke
>     return handler(self, *args, **kw)
>   File "/pox/pox/forwarding/test_wayne2.py", line 97, in _handle_PacketIn
>     packet = event.parse()
>   File "/pox/pox/openflow/__init__.py", line 162, in parse
>     self._parsed = ethernet(self.data)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/ethernet.py", line 102, in __init__
>     self.parse(raw)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/ethernet.py", line 124, in parse
>     self.next = ethernet.type_parsers[self.type](raw[ethernet.MIN_LEN:], self)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/ipv4.py", line 96, in __init__
>     self.parse(raw)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/ipv4.py", line 153, in parse
>     self.next = udp(raw=raw[self.hl*4:length], prev=self)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/udp.py", line 70, in __init__
>     self.parse(raw)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/udp.py", line 100, in parse
>     self.next = dhcp(raw=raw[udp.MIN_LEN:],prev=self)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/dhcp.py", line 135, in __init__
>     self.parse(raw)
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/dhcp.py", line 205, in parse
>     self.parseOptions()
>   File "/pox/pox/lib/packet/dhcp.py", line 215, in parseOptions
>     (opt_val[0],))
> TypeError: %u format: a number is required, not str
> 
> Did this error caused by the interlaced time between packet come to controller and delete flows from controller?

Your POX code is more than three months out of date and the DHCP code has changed significantly since then.
I propose that you using a more up to date version of the POX code is a better usage of everyone's time than me tracking down problems that might not have existed since February.

If you continue to run into problems with the up to date code, please let me know!

-- Murphy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noxrepo.org/pipermail/pox-dev-noxrepo.org/attachments/20130519/3b2e7b4b/attachment-0002.htm>