netdev - Re: [Question]: should we consider arp missed max during bond_ab_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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Zyt_58BFKnZvtsHx@nanopsycho.orion>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 15:40:39 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
Cc: Jay Vosburgh <jv@...sburgh.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Question]: should we consider arp missed max during
 bond_ab_arp_probe()?

Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 10:25:30AM CET, liuhangbin@...il.com wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 09:34:59AM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 08:39:48AM CET, liuhangbin@...il.com wrote:
>> >Hi Jay,
>> >
>> >Our QE reported that, when there is no active slave during
>> >bond_ab_arp_probe(), the slaves send the arp probe message one by one. This
>> >will flap the switch's mac table quickly, sometimes even make the switch stop
>> >learning mac address. So should we consider the arp missed max during
>> >bond_ab_arp_probe()? i.e. each slave has more chances to send probe messages
>> >before switch to another slave. What do you think?
>> 
>> Out of curiosity, is anyone still using AB mode in real life? And if
>
>Based on our analyse, in year 2024, there are 53.8% users using 802.3ad mode,
>41.6% users using active-backup mode. 2.5% users using round-robin mode.
>
>> yes, any idea why exacly?
>
>I think they just want to make sure there is a backup for the link.

Why don't they use LACP? You can have backup there as well.

>
>Thanks
>Hangbin