From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Haber Subject: Re: Bridge stays down until a port is added Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:54:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20110811205429.GB21307@torres.zugschlus.de> References: <20110811070659.GA21307@torres.zugschlus.de> <20110811081706.7307e8b2@nehalam.ftrdhcpuser.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from torres.zugschlus.de ([85.214.131.164]:57678 "EHLO torres.zugschlus.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753813Ab1HKUya (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:54:30 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110811081706.7307e8b2@nehalam.ftrdhcpuser.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Stephen, On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 08:17:06AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:06:59 +0200 > Marc Haber wrote: > > Is that a feature? If so, why does the interface stay pingable after > > removing the dummy0 interface from the bridge? > > Yes, there are no links to send a packet so it seems logical > that there would be no carrier. Yes, but if I can configure an IP address to the bridge I would expect it to be reachable even if there are no interfaces in the bridge. "Older" kernels used to behave like that. > > New new behavior is somewhat unhandy when one uses the bridge address > > for services that the host offers, to save on IP addresses and > > networks (for example, when one has only a single IP address and a > > single additional network), since one has to take extra measures to > > have the addresses on the bridge interface reachable. > > > > Or am I doing things wrong? > > The goal is to make the bridge behave the same as a vlan or > a physical device. Could you explain better what the application(s) > would expect. I have a number of housing systems that have only a single IP address on their eth0, but an IP network routed to bring virtual machines running on these systems online. The virtual machines are all on br0, and the host is routing between eth0 and br0. To route, it needs its own IP address on br0, and I have not resisted the temptation of running servies on the br0 IP address. It is unnatural to not have the br0 IP address reachable unless the first VM is running. I have, in the mean time, created a dummy0 interface and am adding dummy0 to br0 just to have the bridge operational, but that's a hack. I'd like to have the old behavior back as an optional configuration. Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 3221 2323190