netdev - Re: bridge interface initial carrier state

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20130211135930.4cdad83c@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
Date:	Mon, 11 Feb 2013 13:59:30 -0800
From:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To:	Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bridge interface initial carrier state

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:01:55 -0600
Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I'm wondering if the initial carrier state of 'on' is intentional for a
> bridge without ports; immediately after adding ports, the carrier is
> recalculated and depends on the combined state of each port's carrier
> and STP forwarding state.  So a userspace program attempting to decide
> whether the bridge was usable or not has to look at both (a) how many
> ports are available and (b) bridge carrier state, instead of just
> looking at the bridge carrier state.
> 
> Dan

Perhaps a future enhancement of bridge would be to use operstate flags
to indicate lower layer down if there are no ports.
--
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