| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20130212210605.GA28929@minipsycho.orion> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:06:05 +0100 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org> Cc: Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: bridge interface initial carrier state Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:58:36PM CET, stephen@...workplumber.org wrote: >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 > >It really should be off when no ports are present, but some initial startup >scripts broke when it was that way. How so? Can you give me an example of that script? I think that any script should be able to handle a situation when carrier of some device is down... >-- >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 -- 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