All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
To: "Nicolas de Pesloüan" <nicolas.2p.debian@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bridge: leave carrier on for empty bridge
Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 09:36:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110904093634.685d7c56@nehalam.ftrdhcpuser.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E632A2E.5040805@gmail.com>

On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 09:35:10 +0200
Nicolas de Pesloüan <nicolas.2p.debian@gmail.com> wrote:

> Le 04/09/2011 06:14, Stephen Hemminger a écrit :
> 
> >> Instead of asserting carrier when the bridge have no port, can't we assert carrier when the three
> >> following condition are true at the same time :
> >>
> >> - The bridge have no port.
> >> - At least one IP address is setup on the bridge.
> >> - The two above conditions are true for more than a configurable amount of seconds, with a default
> >> of 10, for example.
> >>
> >> This would only delay carrier on for a few seconds for the regression and keep the current behavior
> >> (carrier off until at least 1 port is on) for DHCP.
> >
> > This fails on two counts:
> > 1. Bridge's often run without IP addresses!
> > 2. DHCP won't try and send out request until carrier is true.
> 
> Sorry, I missed to say that we should of course also assert carrier on if one port has carrier on.
> 
> And rethinking about it, the delay is probably useless :
> 
> bridge_carrier_on = at_least_one_port_has_carrier_on | (bridge_has_no_port & bridge_has_at_least_one_ip)
> 
> That way :
> - for those using bridge without any port, manually setting the IP will assert carrier on. (By the 
> way, why don't they use a dummy device instead?)
> 
> - for those using bridge with ports:
> -- Using any kind of autoconfig will work as expected. Carrier will only be asserted at the time 
> first port get carrier.
> -- Using static IP confifiguration, carrier will possibly be erroneously reported as on during the 
> small time gap between IP address configuration and first port is added to the bridge. This time gap 
> may be removed by simply configuring the IP after the first port is added. This is probably already 
> true for most distribs. And anyway, this time gap is probably not a problem.
> -- Carrier will also be erroneously reported as on after removing the last port, if the bridge still 
> has an IP. (But we can arrange for this not to happen).
> 
> And in order to ensure user really understand why carrier is on of off, we can simply issue an INFO 
> message for the non-natural case (bridge_has_no_port & bridga_has_at_least_one_ip).
> 
> I consider all this reasonable.
> 
> 	Nicolas.

Any bridge behaviour based on IP address configuration is a
layering violation and won't work.  The problem is related to dynamic issues
with IPv6 and DHCP and needs to be addressed at that level.

  reply	other threads:[~2011-09-04 16:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20110902172220.830228928@vyatta.com>
2011-09-02 17:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] bridge: leave carrier on for empty bridge Stephen Hemminger
2011-09-02 21:39   ` Nicolas de Pesloüan
2011-09-02 22:11     ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-09-03  2:15       ` Ang Way Chuang
2011-09-03  6:30         ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-09-25  8:55         ` Marc Haber
2011-09-03 18:32       ` Nicolas de Pesloüan
2011-09-04  4:14         ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-09-04  7:35           ` Nicolas de Pesloüan
2011-09-04 16:36             ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2011-09-04 17:12               ` Krzysztof Olędzki
2011-09-05  4:51                 ` Ang Way Chuang
2011-09-05 17:18               ` Nicolas de Pesloüan
2011-09-05 17:57                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-09-05 19:02                   ` Ang Way Chuang
2011-09-05 22:45                     ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-09-06  6:52                   ` Nicolas de Pesloüan
2011-09-25  9:16                     ` Marc Haber
2011-09-25 20:10                       ` Nicolas de Pesloüan
2011-09-25  9:05             ` Marc Haber
2011-09-02 17:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] bridge: set flags in RTM_NEWNEIGH message correctly Stephen Hemminger
     [not found] <20111004041444.793960297@vyatta.com>
2011-10-04  4:14 ` [PATCH 1/2] bridge: leave carrier on for empty bridge Stephen Hemminger
2011-10-06 19:28   ` David Miller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110904093634.685d7c56@nehalam.ftrdhcpuser.net \
    --to=shemminger@vyatta.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolas.2p.debian@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.