netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/3] bonding: allow L2 receive on slaves

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 07 May 2008 23:12:52 -0700
From:	Joe Eykholt <jre@...vasystems.com>
To:	jgarzik@...ox.com, fubar@...ibm.com
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] bonding: allow L2 receive on slaves

Hi Jay and Jeff,

I'm new on this alias and the patch set I submitted on 5/4 is my first 
for Linux.

I'm not sure I'm doing this right, but I have seen no comments at all 
about the
changes.  Would you make some suggestions as to how I should proceed? 

I'm willing to rewrite the patch as necessary to get the problem solved. 
If there's an issue on the basic idea, please let me know what it is.

I saw another recent patch that would allow LLDP to be delivered
on the bond even if it arrived on an inactive slave.  If it would
be more acceptable, we could add FCoE and FIP (being discussed in T11)
as two other exceptions.  This would be low impact as well, but not
as nice for the protocols, IMHO.   For example, if an L2 protocol had
a packet_type using a slave before the bond was created, it would
be cut off from any traffic.

Again, any suggestions would be appreciated. 
I know everyone is busy, so thanks for your time.

    Cheers,
    Joe Eykholt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html