On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 at 04:10, Aaron Conole <aconole@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > LGTM. I guess we should try to codify the specific flows that were used > to flag this into the ovs selftest - we clearly have a missing case > after NAT lookup. Thanks for the review Aaron, and the sensible suggestion to add a test to ovs to avoid this problem occuring again in future. I've simplified our NAT ruleset and turned it into an ovs system test, which I've submitted as a patch [1] to ovs-dev. The test reproduces the issue introduced by ebddb1404900 and passes when e6345d2824a3 is applied. [1]: https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2024-January/410476.html
