* [Bridge] PVST
@ 2007-04-27 0:47 Leigh Sharpe
2007-04-27 4:07 ` Stephen Hemminger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Leigh Sharpe @ 2007-04-27 0:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bridge
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 317 bytes --]
Hi All,
Does the current bridging code handle PVST properly, or just ordinary
STP?
Regards,
Leigh
Leigh Sharpe
Network Systems Engineer
Pacific Wireless
Ph +61 3 9584 8966
Mob 0408 009 502
Helpdesk 1300 300 616
email lsharpe@pacificwireless.com.au
web www.pacificwireless.com.au
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1141 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: [Bridge] PVST 2007-04-27 0:47 [Bridge] PVST Leigh Sharpe @ 2007-04-27 4:07 ` Stephen Hemminger 2007-04-27 4:53 ` Leigh Sharpe 2007-04-27 13:43 ` [Bridge] PVST Benny Amorsen 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2007-04-27 4:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Leigh Sharpe; +Cc: bridge On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:47:42 +1000 "Leigh Sharpe" <lsharpe@pacificwireless.com.au> wrote: > Hi All, > Does the current bridging code handle PVST properly, or just ordinary > STP? Ordinary, STP. The 2.6.22 kernel will have all the bits to run STP in user mode, and there is a version of RSTP in userspace see: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/shemminger/git/rstp.git The RSTP code uses the rstplib and it knows about VLAN's, but the hooks aren't there yet. Eventually, full MSTP 802.Q seems like a good idea. Someone had sent some patches to do PVST, but PVST seems to be Cisco centric. and the patched version was too inflexible, so I didn't put it in mainline. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: [Bridge] PVST 2007-04-27 4:07 ` Stephen Hemminger @ 2007-04-27 4:53 ` Leigh Sharpe 2007-04-27 10:38 ` Leigh Sharpe 2007-04-27 13:43 ` [Bridge] PVST Benny Amorsen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Leigh Sharpe @ 2007-04-27 4:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: shemminger; +Cc: bridge So, if I put a linux bridge in a network which has PVST packets flying around, will it pass them, or silently drop them? Should I have STP disabled on my linux box? (I'm particularly referring to a 6.2.19-ish kernel, before the patches of the last few days) Regards, Leigh Leigh Sharpe Network Systems Engineer Pacific Wireless Ph +61 3 9584 8966 Mob 0408 009 502 Helpdesk 1300 300 616 email lsharpe@pacificwireless.com.au web www.pacificwireless.com.au -----Original Message----- From: shemminger@linux-foundation.org [mailto:shemminger@linux-foundation.org] Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 2:07 PM To: Leigh Sharpe Cc: bridge Subject: Re: [Bridge] PVST On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:47:42 +1000 "Leigh Sharpe" <lsharpe@pacificwireless.com.au> wrote: > Hi All, > Does the current bridging code handle PVST properly, or just ordinary > STP? Ordinary, STP. The 2.6.22 kernel will have all the bits to run STP in user mode, and there is a version of RSTP in userspace see: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/shemminger/git/rstp.git The RSTP code uses the rstplib and it knows about VLAN's, but the hooks aren't there yet. Eventually, full MSTP 802.Q seems like a good idea. Someone had sent some patches to do PVST, but PVST seems to be Cisco centric. and the patched version was too inflexible, so I didn't put it in mainline. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: [Bridge] PVST 2007-04-27 4:53 ` Leigh Sharpe @ 2007-04-27 10:38 ` Leigh Sharpe 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Leigh Sharpe @ 2007-04-27 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Leigh Sharpe, shemminger; +Cc: bridge >(I'm particularly referring to a 6.2.19-ish kernel, before the patches of the last few days) Err, perhaps I actually mean 2.6.19-ish.... -----Original Message----- From: Leigh Sharpe Sent: Friday, 27 April 2007 2:53 PM To: shemminger Cc: bridge Subject: RE: [Bridge] PVST So, if I put a linux bridge in a network which has PVST packets flying around, will it pass them, or silently drop them? Should I have STP disabled on my linux box? (I'm particularly referring to a 6.2.19-ish kernel, before the patches of the last few days) Regards, Leigh Leigh Sharpe Network Systems Engineer Pacific Wireless Ph +61 3 9584 8966 Mob 0408 009 502 Helpdesk 1300 300 616 email lsharpe@pacificwireless.com.au web www.pacificwireless.com.au -----Original Message----- From: shemminger@linux-foundation.org [mailto:shemminger@linux-foundation.org] Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 2:07 PM To: Leigh Sharpe Cc: bridge Subject: Re: [Bridge] PVST On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:47:42 +1000 "Leigh Sharpe" <lsharpe@pacificwireless.com.au> wrote: > Hi All, > Does the current bridging code handle PVST properly, or just ordinary > STP? Ordinary, STP. The 2.6.22 kernel will have all the bits to run STP in user mode, and there is a version of RSTP in userspace see: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/shemminger/git/rstp.git The RSTP code uses the rstplib and it knows about VLAN's, but the hooks aren't there yet. Eventually, full MSTP 802.Q seems like a good idea. Someone had sent some patches to do PVST, but PVST seems to be Cisco centric. and the patched version was too inflexible, so I didn't put it in mainline. _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bridge] Re: PVST 2007-04-27 4:07 ` Stephen Hemminger 2007-04-27 4:53 ` Leigh Sharpe @ 2007-04-27 13:43 ` Benny Amorsen 2007-04-27 18:48 ` Stephen Hemminger 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Benny Amorsen @ 2007-04-27 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bridge >>>>> "SH" == Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org> writes: SH> Someone had sent some patches to do PVST, but PVST seems to be SH> Cisco centric. and the patched version was too inflexible, so I SH> didn't put it in mainline. PVST is indeed Cisco centric. It is also the only way to stay sane if you have several VLAN's. However, isn't PVST the same as making a br100 out of eth0.100 and eth1.100, and turning STP on? Hopefully the STP packets should then emerge with a VLAN tag of 100. /Benny ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bridge] Re: PVST 2007-04-27 13:43 ` [Bridge] PVST Benny Amorsen @ 2007-04-27 18:48 ` Stephen Hemminger 2007-04-27 23:19 ` Benny Amorsen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2007-04-27 18:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Benny Amorsen; +Cc: bridge On 27 Apr 2007 15:43:00 +0200 Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet@amorsen.dk> wrote: > >>>>> "SH" == Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org> writes: > > SH> Someone had sent some patches to do PVST, but PVST seems to be > SH> Cisco centric. and the patched version was too inflexible, so I > SH> didn't put it in mainline. > > PVST is indeed Cisco centric. It is also the only way to stay sane if > you have several VLAN's. > > However, isn't PVST the same as making a br100 out of eth0.100 and > eth1.100, and turning STP on? Hopefully the STP packets should then > emerge with a VLAN tag of 100. > > > /Benny > > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge mailing list > Bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge The problem is if you bridge two vlan's then the Cisco box will see two STP bpdu's arrive, and conclude that there is a cycle and bring the link down. -- Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bridge] Re: PVST 2007-04-27 18:48 ` Stephen Hemminger @ 2007-04-27 23:19 ` Benny Amorsen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Benny Amorsen @ 2007-04-27 23:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bridge >>>>> "SH" == Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org> writes: SH> The problem is if you bridge two vlan's then the Cisco box will SH> see two STP bpdu's arrive, and conclude that there is a cycle and SH> bring the link down. Even if the VLAN's are both numbered 100? Bridging eth0.100 with eth1.101 won't work if a Cisco is involved, but that is not so surprising. /Benny ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-04-27 23:19 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2007-04-27 0:47 [Bridge] PVST Leigh Sharpe 2007-04-27 4:07 ` Stephen Hemminger 2007-04-27 4:53 ` Leigh Sharpe 2007-04-27 10:38 ` Leigh Sharpe 2007-04-27 13:43 ` [Bridge] PVST Benny Amorsen 2007-04-27 18:48 ` Stephen Hemminger 2007-04-27 23:19 ` Benny Amorsen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox