From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <41E299D4.2010605@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:05:56 -0500 From: Neil Horman MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20050110140638.GH7529@thunderchild.debian.net> In-Reply-To: <20050110140638.GH7529@thunderchild.debian.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Bridge] Re: tg3 bridge problems List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gergely Madarasz Cc: linux-net@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.osdl.org Gergely Madarasz wrote: > Hello, > > I've got a very strange problem. Lately I've been setting up my linux > servers for network (layer2) redundancy with a bridge interface containing > two ethernet interfaces connecting to two switches. So far I didn't have > any problems with it, but now a very strange thing happens with a new > server I'm installing. The server is an ibm x346 having two onboard > BCM5721 cards, the switches are cisco 3550, and I've tested with kernel > versions 2.6.10 and 2.4.28. > > The bpdu's from the cisco switches simply cannot be seen on the server, > causing loops in l2 traffic. I've tested with sticking a hub between the > c3550 and the server, the switch sends out the bpdu's, but they are not > seen by linux (running tethereal). This happens only on eth0, on eth1 > everything seems fine. Any IP traffic on eth0 goes through, no packet > loss, no errors. > > And something even more strange: if I do an > ifconfig eth0 0 up; brctl addif br0 eth0; > it seems to be working fine, if I do it the other way > round, then the bpdu's sent by the switches are lost somewhere. > > Considering all these, the problem seems to me a strange interaction > between the bridge driver, the tg3 driver and the hardware in question. > > Any ideas? > > Greg > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html It looks to me like either order should work just fine, as long as the IFF_PROMISC flag isn't cleared when you bring up the interface. Is IF_PROMISC clear in ifconfig after you issue your ifconfig eth0 up command? Neil -- /*************************************************** *Neil Horman *Software Engineer *Red Hat, Inc. *nhorman@redhat.com *gpg keyid: 1024D / 0x92A74FA1 *http://pgp.mit.edu ***************************************************/