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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:08:13 +0200 From: Vitalii Demianets <vitas@...factor.kiev.ua> To: Andrew Collins <bsderandrew@...il.com> Cc: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, shemminger@...tta.com, davem@...emloft.net, or.gerlitz@...il.com, jhs@...atatu.com, mst@...hat.com, erdnetdev@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V4 00/13] Add basic VLAN support to bridges On Thursday 20 December 2012 00:54:27 Andrew Collins wrote: > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com> wrote: > > This series of patches provides an ability to add VLANs to the bridge > > ports. This is similar to what can be found in most switches. The > > bridge port may have any number of VLANs added to it including vlan 0 > > priority tagged traffic. When vlans are added to the port, only traffic > > tagged with particular vlan will forwarded over this port. Additionally, > > vlan ids are added to FDB entries and become part of the lookup. This > > way we correctly identify the FDB entry. > > This is likely well beyond the scope of this change, but I figured I'd > throw out the question anyway. This changeset looks to bring the > Linux bridging code closer to the 802.1Q-2005 definition of a bridge, > which is nice to see, I'm curious if this changeset also opens up the > possibility of supporting MSTP in the future? The big thing I see > missing is per-VLAN port state, although I'm not very familiar with > the current STP/bridge interactions. Has anyone put any thought into > what other necessary bridge pieces might be missing for MSTP support? I think, to be compatible with 802.1Q-2005 we need the following pieces: 1) Multiple FIDs (it is 802.1Q term for FDB) support. It means that kernel should support several independent FDBs on a single bridge. The 802.1Q-2005 standard requires the number of supported FDBs to be no less than the number of different MSTIs the implementation supports; 2) VLAN-to-FDB mapping should be introduced; 3) Support of Multiple Spanning Tree Instances (MSTIs); 4) FDB-to-MSTI mapping should be introduced; 5) And finally, per-MST port states should be implemented. > obviously something to handle the MSTP protocol itself would need to exist as well Please look here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mstpd/ -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists