netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V4 00/13] Add basic VLAN support to bridges

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

Message-ID: <20121220090712.736dff45@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
Date:	Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:07:12 -0800
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	Vitalii Demianets <vitas@...factor.kiev.ua>
Cc:	Andrew Collins <bsderandrew@...il.com>,
	Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	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 Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:08:13 +0200
Vitalii Demianets <vitas@...factor.kiev.ua> wrote:

> 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/

A couple of points:
* How does this compare with features/functionality of commercial
  hardware bridges?
* Is this as simple as possible? It looks like there is creeping-featurism
  here. I am all for a simple extension to allow bridge vlan filtering, but
  not the added complexity of "let's teach bridges all about all possible
  things any user might want to do with vlan.s"


 
--
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