netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: bridge: add support for backup port

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <649cf32d-68c1-dc2e-74fd-4659ce3203fd@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Jul 2018 11:03:56 +0300
From:   Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@....ntt.co.jp>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Anuradha Karuppiah <anuradhak@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        Wilson Kok <wkok@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: bridge: add support for backup port

On 23/07/18 09:15, Toshiaki Makita wrote:
> On 2018/07/21 1:41, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Stephen Hemminger
>> <stephen@...workplumber.org> wrote:
>>> Trying to understand this.
>>>
>>> Is it the case that what you are trying to solve is the way MLAG
>>> and bridging interact on the Linux side or more a limitation of how
>>> switches operate?  Wouldn't this work?
>>
>> not a limitation. Its the way MLAG works on the switch side
>>
>>>
>>>                 br0 -- team0 -- eth1
>>>                              +- eth2
>>>
>>> The bridge would only have fdb entries for the team device.
>>> Why do eth1 and eth2 have to be master devices?  Why would eth1
>>> and eth2 need to be bridge ports.
>>
>>
>> Two switches acting in a MLAG pair are connected by the peerlink
>> interface which is a bridge port.
>>
>> the config on one of the switches looks like the below. The other
>> switch also has a similar config.
>> eth0 is connected to one port on the server. And the server is
>> connected to both switches.
>>
>>
>> br0 -- team0---eth0
>>       |
>>       -- switch-peerlink
>>
>> switch-peerlink becomes the failover/backport port when say team0 to
>> the server goes down.
> 
> I feel like this kind of diagram in commitlog would help us understand
> what you/Nikolay want to do. I was also not able to get why team/bonding
> is not an option reading commitlog. (Now I think I understand it thanks
> to Roopa's explanation.)
> 

Fair enough, I'll send v3 with Roopa's explanation and diagram added.

Thanks,
 Nik