From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vitalii Demianets Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V4 00/13] Add basic VLAN support to bridges Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:08:13 +0200 Message-ID: <201212201208.14204.vitas@nppfactor.kiev.ua> References: <1355939304-21804-1-git-send-email-vyasevic@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Vlad Yasevich , netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@vyatta.com, davem@davemloft.net, or.gerlitz@gmail.com, jhs@mojatatu.com, mst@redhat.com, erdnetdev@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us To: Andrew Collins Return-path: Received: from mx3.cyfra.ua ([62.80.160.182]:43370 "EHLO mx3.cyfra.ua" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750956Ab2LTK23 (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:28:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 20 December 2012 00:54:27 Andrew Collins wrote: > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Vlad Yasevich wrote: > > This series of patches provides an ability to add VLANs to the bridge > > ports. This is similar to what can be found in most switches. The > > bridge port may have any number of VLANs added to it including vlan 0 > > priority tagged traffic. When vlans are added to the port, only traffic > > tagged with particular vlan will forwarded over this port. Additionally, > > vlan ids are added to FDB entries and become part of the lookup. This > > way we correctly identify the FDB entry. > > This is likely well beyond the scope of this change, but I figured I'd > throw out the question anyway. This changeset looks to bring the > Linux bridging code closer to the 802.1Q-2005 definition of a bridge, > which is nice to see, I'm curious if this changeset also opens up the > possibility of supporting MSTP in the future? The big thing I see > missing is per-VLAN port state, although I'm not very familiar with > the current STP/bridge interactions. Has anyone put any thought into > what other necessary bridge pieces might be missing for MSTP support? I think, to be compatible with 802.1Q-2005 we need the following pieces: 1) Multiple FIDs (it is 802.1Q term for FDB) support. It means that kernel should support several independent FDBs on a single bridge. The 802.1Q-2005 standard requires the number of supported FDBs to be no less than the number of different MSTIs the implementation supports; 2) VLAN-to-FDB mapping should be introduced; 3) Support of Multiple Spanning Tree Instances (MSTIs); 4) FDB-to-MSTI mapping should be introduced; 5) And finally, per-MST port states should be implemented. > obviously something to handle the MSTP protocol itself would need to exist as well Please look here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mstpd/