Is the STP state of each port part of "set get port info"? > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:shemminger@xxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 6:07 PM > To: davem@xxxxxxxxxx > Cc: bridge@xxxxxxxx > Subject: [Bridge] [RFC] bridge kernel API change > > > Here is the proposed revision to the bridge utilities > interface to the kernel. The driving force is that the > existing interface can't easily be converted to 32/64 bit > compat. Right now, the bridge-utils (brctl) tries to handle > 32bit command on 64 bit kernel, but the code is limited to sparc > and wrong. > > Here is what I am thinking. > > get version - not needed? > get bridges - /sys/class/bridge/* > add bridge - SIOCBR_ADD_BRIDGE > del bridge - SIOCBR_DEL_BRIDGE > add if - SIOCBR_ADD_IF > delete if - SIOCBR_DEL_IF > get bridge info - /sys/class/bridge/brX/ > get port list - /sys/class/bridge/brX/ports/* > set bridge forward delay - /sys/class/bridge/brX/forward_delay > set bridge hello time - /sys/class/bridge/brX/hello_time > set bridge max age - /sys/class/bridge/brX/max_age > set ageing time - /sys/class/bridge/brX/ageing_time > set gc interval - deprecated does nothing anymore > set get port info - /sys/class/bridge/brX/ports/ethX/* > set bridge stp state - /sys/class/bridge/brX/stp > set bridge priority - /sys/class/bridge/brX/priority > set port priority - /sys/class/bridge/brX/ports/ethX/priority > set path cost - /sys/class/bridge/brX/ports/ethX/cost > get fdb entries - /proc/net/bridge/brX > > Other alternatives: > - Use just ioctl's > - Use just /proc (ugh) or sysctl's (double ugh) > > I expect that for 2.6 the kernel will accept (but warn) the old ioctl > interface. The new utility will not generate the old ioctl's > it would only work with new interface... > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge mailing list > Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge >
