netdev - Re: [Xen-devel] xen-netback notify DomU to send ARP.

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: <1357732983.7989.251.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
Date:	Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:03:03 +0000
From:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
To:	Jason Luan <luanjianhai@....com>
CC:	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen-netback notify DomU to send ARP.

On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 01:07 +0000, Jason Luan wrote:
> 于 2013年01月09日 00:00, Ian Campbell 写道:
> > On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 15:40 +0000, jianhai luan wrote:
> >> On 2013-1-8 21:42, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 13:13 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 08.01.13 at 12:57, jianhai luan <jianhai.luan@...cle.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>      When Xen Dom0's network circumstance changed, DomU
> >>>>> should be notified in some special condition. For
> >>>>> example the below circumstance:
> >>>>>      ping from Guest A to DomU:
> >>>>>      Guest A --> eth0 - bond0 - xenbr0 --VIF(DOMU)
> >>>>>                  eth1 /
> >>>>>      when eth0 inactive, and eth1 active.
> >>> How is eth0 failing? Are you unplugging it, un-enslaving it or
> >>> taking
> >>> some other sort of administrative action?
> >> In my emulation environment, i unplug it or ifdown the interface,
> > I expect these would behave rather different, since the affect of ifdown
> > looks rather different to an unplug from the PoV of the switch.
> >
> > Is the ifdown case something which you are trying to solve or just what
> > appeared to be a convenient test case? I'd be less inclined to worry
> > about explict admin actions such as that.
> >
> > Unplugging the cable should cause:
> >
> I do above listed thing to let switch active slave only.
> I think that we should put attention on the thing which bond switch 
> active slave interface in active-backup mode. In network circumstance, 
> many thing will cause the switch, what do Vif when the event happen?

Sorry, I'm having a bit of trouble parsing the above, but are you asking
what the VIF should do when the active slave in the bond changes without
the previously active slave actually failing?

The issue is that traffic will continue to arrive on the now inactive
slave, but will be discarded (the expected behaviour for
Active/Passive)?

Is this something which happens in practice? Does the active slave
change even while it remains a viable path?

Ian.

--
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