Hi Srinivas On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 15:02 +0530, Srinivas M.A. wrote: > Hi Joakim, > > Would you be interested in testing out a newer implementation that > we now have? This is > much closer to the 802.1D-2004 standard and has passed the UNH RSTP > protocol tests. Sure am interested, thanks for the offer. > My updates have not yet made it to Stephen Hemminger's git repo, but I > am attaching a Any time frame when this will hit Hemminger's repo? > a patch set on top of that, as well as a tarball of my git-repo with > the additional commits. OK, will use your repo to begin with. > > I don't know how the mailing list handles attachments, let me see anyway. Got both of them. > > I am interested in seeing this used more, and I will be happy to > assist with any issues. Please > let me know how things go. > > This is fairly new code, but it has gone through some testing and use. > One limitation > is that there is no mechanism to automatically restart or fall back to > kernel STP if the RSTP > daemon crashes. But it hasn't crashed lately in our testing. :) lets see, the lab here tends to create some really funny loops, often by mistake. > > Thanks. > Srinivas. > > P.S.: One note on bridge-stp and general bridge startup. > > We started out with needing an explicit rstpctl command to indicate > to the daemon that it needs to run RSTP on a bridge, which is why there is the > "exec /sbin/rstpctl rstp $bridge on ;;" (as you corrected in your patch.) > > But now, the daemon is written to enable RSTP when it finds that the > kernel is treating the > bridge as RSTP (/sys/class/net/<bridge_name>/bridge/stp_state is 2), > so as long as you run > "brctl stp <bridge_name> on" before briding the bridge interface up, > you can just have a > bridge-stp script that returns 0 (success) when you want rstpd to > handle the bridge, and > non-zero when you want kernel STP running on the bridge. > > That startup sequence we use is: > 0. Have a bridge-stp that returns 0 if you want RSTP for the > particular bridge name. > Or returns 0 always if you intend to have only one bridge, and want RSTP. > > 1. Start rstpd > 2. Configure the bridge (brctl addbr, brctl addif's ...) > 3. brctl stp <bridge_name> on > 4. ifconfig <bridge_name> up. (Or ifup <bridge_name>, which should > apply any IP config.) OK, will, hopefully, try this this week. Today the girls got a new pet and they are all over the place :) Jocke > > > On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Joakim Tjernlund > <Joakim.Tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Joakim Tjernlund [mailto:Joakim.Tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: den 29 mars 2008 17:22 > > > To: 'Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' > > > Subject: RSTP in http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/shemminger/rstp.git;a=summary problems > > > > > > Hi List > > > > > > I cloned the above RSTP imp. and cross-compiled it to powerpc and tried > > > in on my 2.6.23 kernel, but didn't get very far: > > > > > > Created a bridge, br0, with brctl and added two interfaces. > > > started rstpd without args and ran rstpctl > > > rstpctl showbridge br0 > > > and all I get is > > > CTL_get_bridge_state: Got return code 0, 1003 > > > Failed to get bridge state: Err_Bridge_is_down > > > > > > The br0 i/f is UP amd RUNNING and so is the interfaces I added. > > > I probably forgot to do something I suppose, but what? > > > > > > Jocke > > > > Never mind, user error on my part. > > > > I do wonder though if rstpd is production ready or still needs more > > testing/fixes? > > > > > > > > Jocke _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
