Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 08:53:13AM CET, kaber@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > David Miller wrote: >> From: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:52:06 +0100 >> >>> (resend, updated changelog, hook moved into skb_bond_should_drop, >>> skb_bond_should_drop ifdefed) >>> >>> Hi all. >>> >>> The problem is described in following bugzilla: >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487763 >> ... >>> This patch solves the situation in the bonding without touching bridge code, >>> as Patrick suggested. For every incoming frame to bonding it searches the >>> destination address in slaves list and if any of slave addresses matches, it >>> rewrites the address in frame by the adress of bonding master. This ensures that >>> all frames comming thru the bonding in alb mode have the same address. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> >> I don't like the hook, but if that's how it's best done.... >> >> Patrick, please review this. > > Me neither, but I don't think this approach can be done without the > hook. While I still find it questionable whether this mode really > needs to be supported for a bridge at all Well there is I think nothing unusual in this net scheme. And by for example the increasing setups with kvm/bridging it will be needed more and more. > , an alternative approach > would be to have bonding add FDB entries for all secondary MACs to > make bridging treat them as local. Yes - that is the clear way. But there's not really straihtforward way to do this. The clear approach would be to extend struct net_device for list of these mac addresses and let the drivers (binding) fill it and bridge to process it. But I don't know. _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
