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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2007 14:48:29 -0700
From:	Jay Vosburgh <>
To:	Tsutomu Fujii <>
Subject: Re: Bonding in active-backup mode with arp monitoring on Xen 

Tsutomu Fujii <> wrote:
>The network structure is the following.
>|        virtual I/F(eth0)      | <- have IP address.
>|      virtual bridge(xenbr0)   |
>|         bonding(bond0)        | <- don't have IP address
>|phy I/F(peth0)| |phy I/F(peth1)|
>+--------------+ +--------------+
>How about removing bond_has_ip() from the condition for calling
>bond_arp_send_all() to use bonding with xen?
>When I removed bond_has_ip(), the resulting kernel worked fine and
>active-backup mode works with arp monitoring.

	I looked at this a bit.  I believe that when you remove the
bond_has_ip() test, the ARP probes sent out will be of the form "ARP
who-has A.B.C.D tell", which the linux kernel will interpret as
IPv4 Duplicate Address Detection probes (as a special case in
arp_process()), and generate some type of reply.  That reply appears to
be enough to keep the ARP monitor happy.

	I'm not sure if this is a solution that will work for any peer
(some peers may not reply to an ARP with an IP source of all zeros).  At
first glance, there doesn't seem to be much of a downside, but I'll have
to experiment with it a bit to see if the check should be optional or
simply removed entirely.


	-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center,
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists