* Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces @ 2020-09-11 10:48 Alessandro Bolletta 2020-09-11 12:01 ` Sven Eckelmann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Alessandro Bolletta @ 2020-09-11 10:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b.a.t.m.a.n Hi, if I pass tagged ethernet traffic inside a bat0 interface (without creating an alias that uses the linux vlan stack for transparent tagging), is this being allowed by batman-adv? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 10:48 Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces Alessandro Bolletta @ 2020-09-11 12:01 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 12:19 ` Alessandro Bolletta 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 12:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b.a.t.m.a.n; +Cc: Alessandro Bolletta [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 318 bytes --] On Friday, 11 September 2020 12:48:52 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > if I pass tagged ethernet traffic inside a bat0 interface (without > creating an alias that uses the linux vlan stack for transparent > tagging), is this being allowed by batman-adv? Not since batman-adv was made VLAN aware. Kind regards, Sven [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 12:01 ` Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 12:19 ` Alessandro Bolletta 2020-09-11 12:48 ` Sven Eckelmann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Alessandro Bolletta @ 2020-09-11 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sven Eckelmann; +Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n So you mean that it is not feasible to create a (single) linux network interface that let me send traffic on the batman-adv network in an untagged or tagged way, though the same interface I mean? Il giorno ven 11 set 2020 alle ore 14:01 Sven Eckelmann <sven@narfation.org> ha scritto: > > On Friday, 11 September 2020 12:48:52 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > > if I pass tagged ethernet traffic inside a bat0 interface (without > > creating an alias that uses the linux vlan stack for transparent > > tagging), is this being allowed by batman-adv? > > Not since batman-adv was made VLAN aware. > > Kind regards, > Sven ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 12:19 ` Alessandro Bolletta @ 2020-09-11 12:48 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 12:50 ` Sven Eckelmann [not found] ` <CADJ1cUQZ2YqFSVj=SNhPcC_sOjy+AkrEr=dQ=8T_0HegFou=Hw@mail.gmail.com> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alessandro Bolletta; +Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 860 bytes --] On Friday, 11 September 2020 14:19:59 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > So you mean that it is not feasible to create a (single) linux network > interface that let me send traffic on the batman-adv network in an > untagged or tagged way, though the same interface I mean? batman-adv is depending on the Linux code telling it what VLAN it should handle (through ndo_vlan_rx_add_vid and ndo_vlan_rx_kill_vid). So something like the 8021q driver or the bridge code for vlans. Only when this was done, it will also handle the addresses in TT. So no, bat0 is not enough to transport something like an ethernet frame tagged as vlan1. You also need bat0.1 (assuming this is the vlan interface for VID 1). But it is then not really relevant for it whether the data was send through bat0.1 or was somehow else tagged and then put into bat0. Kind regards, Sven [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 12:48 ` Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 12:50 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 13:25 ` dan 2020-09-11 13:46 ` Alessandro Bolletta [not found] ` <CADJ1cUQZ2YqFSVj=SNhPcC_sOjy+AkrEr=dQ=8T_0HegFou=Hw@mail.gmail.com> 1 sibling, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 12:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alessandro Bolletta; +Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1113 bytes --] On Friday, 11 September 2020 14:48:19 CEST Sven Eckelmann wrote: > On Friday, 11 September 2020 14:19:59 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > > So you mean that it is not feasible to create a (single) linux network > > interface that let me send traffic on the batman-adv network in an > > untagged or tagged way, though the same interface I mean? > > batman-adv is depending on the Linux code telling it what VLAN it should > handle (through ndo_vlan_rx_add_vid and ndo_vlan_rx_kill_vid). So something > like the 8021q driver or the bridge code for vlans. Only when this was done, > it will also handle the addresses in TT. So no, bat0 is not enough to > transport something like an ethernet frame tagged as vlan1. You also need > bat0.1 (assuming this is the vlan interface for VID 1). But it is then not > really relevant for it whether the data was send through bat0.1 or was somehow > else tagged and then put into bat0. Btw. why are you now using VLANs on top of bat0 - weren't you trying before to have multiple mesh clouds by using VLAN (or VLAN-like) technologies below bat0? Kind regards, Sven [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 12:50 ` Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 13:25 ` dan 2020-09-11 14:12 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 13:46 ` Alessandro Bolletta 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: dan @ 2020-09-11 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking I see value in both methods, but for my use case I'm most interested in bat0 as the 'fabric' so the batman-adv nodes don't need any additional configuration to carry the VLANs. so, based on the previous statement, is the way to make bat0 agnostic about VLANs to create a bridge br0 and put bat0 in br0 and then make a br0.10 vlan interface? On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 6:50 AM Sven Eckelmann <sven@narfation.org> wrote: > > On Friday, 11 September 2020 14:48:19 CEST Sven Eckelmann wrote: > > On Friday, 11 September 2020 14:19:59 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > > > So you mean that it is not feasible to create a (single) linux network > > > interface that let me send traffic on the batman-adv network in an > > > untagged or tagged way, though the same interface I mean? > > > > batman-adv is depending on the Linux code telling it what VLAN it should > > handle (through ndo_vlan_rx_add_vid and ndo_vlan_rx_kill_vid). So something > > like the 8021q driver or the bridge code for vlans. Only when this was done, > > it will also handle the addresses in TT. So no, bat0 is not enough to > > transport something like an ethernet frame tagged as vlan1. You also need > > bat0.1 (assuming this is the vlan interface for VID 1). But it is then not > > really relevant for it whether the data was send through bat0.1 or was somehow > > else tagged and then put into bat0. > > Btw. why are you now using VLANs on top of bat0 - weren't you trying before to > have multiple mesh clouds by using VLAN (or VLAN-like) technologies below > bat0? > > Kind regards, > Sven ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 13:25 ` dan @ 2020-09-11 14:12 ` Sven Eckelmann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 14:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking; +Cc: dan [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 264 bytes --] On Friday, 11 September 2020 15:25:17 CEST dan wrote: > so, based on the previous statement, is the way to make bat0 agnostic > about VLANs to create a bridge br0 and put bat0 in br0 and then make a > br0.10 vlan interface? Not at the moment. Kind regards, Sven [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 12:50 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 13:25 ` dan @ 2020-09-11 13:46 ` Alessandro Bolletta 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Alessandro Bolletta @ 2020-09-11 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sven Eckelmann; +Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n I see. Ok for transmission purposes, but what if I want to receive a tagged ethernet frame coming from the batman network? Should I must only rely to the related 802.1q interface (eg. bat0.1) or can I receive the whole traffic (untagged and tagged) from the plain bat0 interface, just listening for the incoming traffic on it? If the answer is the first choice, is it possible to have an approach where I can receive coming from bat0 leveraging on a single interface anyway? Could a linux bridge br0 on the top of bat0 interface make it possible? For example, if I connect an openvswitch port configured as trunk to a linux bridge br0 that enslaves bat0, could I expect to see the whole traffic inside the batman-adv mesh network (so I mean, both tagged and untagged traffic) also flowing inside the OvS switch? Is there also a wait to get rid of the linux bridge br0? Thank you. Il giorno ven 11 set 2020 alle ore 14:50 Sven Eckelmann <sven@narfation.org> ha scritto: > > On Friday, 11 September 2020 14:48:19 CEST Sven Eckelmann wrote: > > On Friday, 11 September 2020 14:19:59 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > > > So you mean that it is not feasible to create a (single) linux network > > > interface that let me send traffic on the batman-adv network in an > > > untagged or tagged way, though the same interface I mean? > > > > batman-adv is depending on the Linux code telling it what VLAN it should > > handle (through ndo_vlan_rx_add_vid and ndo_vlan_rx_kill_vid). So something > > like the 8021q driver or the bridge code for vlans. Only when this was done, > > it will also handle the addresses in TT. So no, bat0 is not enough to > > transport something like an ethernet frame tagged as vlan1. You also need > > bat0.1 (assuming this is the vlan interface for VID 1). But it is then not > > really relevant for it whether the data was send through bat0.1 or was somehow > > else tagged and then put into bat0. > > Btw. why are you now using VLANs on top of bat0 - weren't you trying before to > have multiple mesh clouds by using VLAN (or VLAN-like) technologies below > bat0? > > Kind regards, > Sven ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <CADJ1cUQZ2YqFSVj=SNhPcC_sOjy+AkrEr=dQ=8T_0HegFou=Hw@mail.gmail.com>]
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces [not found] ` <CADJ1cUQZ2YqFSVj=SNhPcC_sOjy+AkrEr=dQ=8T_0HegFou=Hw@mail.gmail.com> @ 2020-09-11 14:02 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 14:42 ` Alessandro Bolletta 2020-09-14 6:35 ` Antonio Quartulli 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 14:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alessandro Bolletta; +Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n, Antonio Quartulli [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 809 bytes --] On Friday, 11 September 2020 15:03:13 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > I see. Ok for transmission purposes, but what if I have to receive a tagged > frame? It should not have been send to the other node when there is no TT entry for this mac + VID from the receiver. > Should I only rely to the 8021q interface (eg. bat0.1) or receive the whole > traffic (untagged and tagged) from the plain bat0 interface? Hm? > If this is not feasible, is it possible to handle in someway this? Hm? > A linux > bridge on the top of bat0 interface could make it possible? No, the bridge must also enable the vlan for this bat0 interface. See also https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki/Faq#BATMAN-Advanced-VLAN-questions Maybe Antonio wants to add more things to this discussion. Kind regards, Sven [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 14:02 ` Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 14:42 ` Alessandro Bolletta 2020-09-11 14:44 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 15:03 ` Simon Wunderlich 2020-09-14 6:35 ` Antonio Quartulli 1 sibling, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Alessandro Bolletta @ 2020-09-11 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sven Eckelmann; +Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n, Antonio Quartulli Hi Sven, I'm sorry for being not so clear in my statements. You can read my last "refactored" mail, which is easier to understand: Should I must only rely to the related 802.1q interface (eg. bat0.1) or can I receive the whole traffic (untagged and tagged) from the plain bat0 interface, just listening for the incoming traffic on it? If the answer is the first choice, is it possible to have an approach where I can receive coming from bat0 leveraging on a single interface anyway? Could a linux bridge br0 on the top of bat0 interface make it possible? For example, if I connect an openvswitch port, configured as trunk port, to a linux bridge br0 that enslaves bat0, could I expect to see the whole traffic inside the batman-adv mesh network (so I mean, both tagged and untagged traffic) also "flowing" inside the other OvS switch ports that are attached to that vlans? Moreover, just out of curiosity, is there also another known way to get rid of the linux bridge br0 in order to get this done (attaching the bat0 directly to the OvS switch, for example)? Il giorno ven 11 set 2020 alle ore 16:02 Sven Eckelmann <sven@narfation.org> ha scritto: > > On Friday, 11 September 2020 15:03:13 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > > I see. Ok for transmission purposes, but what if I have to receive a tagged > > frame? > > It should not have been send to the other node when there is no TT entry for > this mac + VID from the receiver. > > > Should I only rely to the 8021q interface (eg. bat0.1) or receive the whole > > traffic (untagged and tagged) from the plain bat0 interface? > > Hm? > > > If this is not feasible, is it possible to handle in someway this? > > Hm? > > > A linux > > bridge on the top of bat0 interface could make it possible? > > No, the bridge must also enable the vlan for this bat0 interface. > > See also > https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki/Faq#BATMAN-Advanced-VLAN-questions > > Maybe Antonio wants to add more things to this discussion. > > Kind regards, > Sven ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 14:42 ` Alessandro Bolletta @ 2020-09-11 14:44 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 15:03 ` Simon Wunderlich 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alessandro Bolletta; +Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n, Antonio Quartulli [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 379 bytes --] On Friday, 11 September 2020 16:42:52 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > I'm sorry for being not so clear in my statements. You can read my > last "refactored" mail, which is easier to understand: > > Should I must only rely to the related 802.1q interface (eg. bat0.1) I already fail to parse this first sentence. I will not continue with this discussion. Kind regards, Sven [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 14:42 ` Alessandro Bolletta 2020-09-11 14:44 ` Sven Eckelmann @ 2020-09-11 15:03 ` Simon Wunderlich 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Simon Wunderlich @ 2020-09-11 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: b.a.t.m.a.n; +Cc: Alessandro Bolletta, Sven Eckelmann, Antonio Quartulli [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3388 bytes --] Hi Alessandro, to use VLANs in batman-adv, you currently have to explicitly set up VLAN interfaces, as it was already explained. You can not just listen to bat0 and expected VLAN tagged frames to go through. This is a limitation of the current code, which basically exists since we integrated VLANs into batman-adv. There were some ideas to register VLANs on the fly inside of batman-adv, but the current implementation relies on the setup of VLANs on top of bat0 provided by the system. If you want to use those VLANs, you have to set up VLAN interfaces for each VLAN ID you want to use. This can get a bit messy if there are many VLANs, but it works. You can't just bridge bat0 to something else and expect VLAN tagged traffic to come out of bat0. I can't say anything about OVS and to which extent bridges can be skipped, but you'll create VLAN devices in that case too. We're open to patches to add VLANs on the fly without requiring explicit VLAN interfaces (maybe by snooping, similar to TT or BLA). I've also run into this scenario a couple of times, but the pain level wasn't high enough to change it yet. ;) Cheers, Simon On Friday, September 11, 2020 4:42:52 PM CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > Hi Sven, > > I'm sorry for being not so clear in my statements. You can read my > last "refactored" mail, which is easier to understand: > > Should I must only rely to the related 802.1q interface (eg. bat0.1) > or can I receive the whole traffic (untagged and tagged) from the > plain bat0 interface, just listening for the incoming traffic on it? > > If the answer is the first choice, is it possible to have an approach > where I can receive coming from bat0 leveraging on a single interface > anyway? Could a linux bridge br0 on the top of bat0 interface make it > possible? > > For example, if I connect an openvswitch port, configured as trunk port, to > a linux bridge br0 that enslaves bat0, could I expect to see the whole > traffic inside the batman-adv mesh network (so I mean, both tagged and > untagged traffic) also "flowing" inside the other OvS switch ports that are > attached to that vlans? > Moreover, just out of curiosity, is there also another known way to > get rid of the linux bridge br0 in order to get this done (attaching > the bat0 directly to the OvS switch, for example)? > > Il giorno ven 11 set 2020 alle ore 16:02 Sven Eckelmann > > <sven@narfation.org> ha scritto: > > On Friday, 11 September 2020 15:03:13 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: > > > I see. Ok for transmission purposes, but what if I have to receive a > > > tagged > > > frame? > > > > It should not have been send to the other node when there is no TT entry > > for this mac + VID from the receiver. > > > > > Should I only rely to the 8021q interface (eg. bat0.1) or receive the > > > whole > > > traffic (untagged and tagged) from the plain bat0 interface? > > > > Hm? > > > > > If this is not feasible, is it possible to handle in someway this? > > > > Hm? > > > > > A linux > > > bridge on the top of bat0 interface could make it possible? > > > > No, the bridge must also enable the vlan for this bat0 interface. > > > > See also > > https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki/Faq#BATMAN-Advanced-VLA > > N-questions > > > > Maybe Antonio wants to add more things to this discussion. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Sven [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces 2020-09-11 14:02 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 14:42 ` Alessandro Bolletta @ 2020-09-14 6:35 ` Antonio Quartulli 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Antonio Quartulli @ 2020-09-14 6:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking, Sven Eckelmann, Alessandro Bolletta On 11/09/2020 16:02, Sven Eckelmann wrote: > Maybe Antonio wants to add more things to this discussion. I believe you and Simon have already been fairly exhaustive. batman-adv simply won't forward any VLAN tagged traffic to nodes that don't have that specific VLAN set up. That's because batman-adv will instantiate a number of internal data structures, along with routing logic, only when the VLAN is created. Regards, -- Antonio Quartulli ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-09-14 6:35 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2020-09-11 10:48 Passing VID-aware ethernet frames on plain batX interfaces Alessandro Bolletta 2020-09-11 12:01 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 12:19 ` Alessandro Bolletta 2020-09-11 12:48 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 12:50 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 13:25 ` dan 2020-09-11 14:12 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 13:46 ` Alessandro Bolletta [not found] ` <CADJ1cUQZ2YqFSVj=SNhPcC_sOjy+AkrEr=dQ=8T_0HegFou=Hw@mail.gmail.com> 2020-09-11 14:02 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 14:42 ` Alessandro Bolletta 2020-09-11 14:44 ` Sven Eckelmann 2020-09-11 15:03 ` Simon Wunderlich 2020-09-14 6:35 ` Antonio Quartulli
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.