Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 6/6] selftests: forwarding: add test of MAC-Auth Bypass to locked port tests

netdev
2022-08-29T12:06:23Z

On 2022-08-29 13:32, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>> The final decision on this rests with you I would say.
>
> If the requirement for this feature (with or without MAB) is to work
> with dynamic entries (which is not what is currently implemented in the
> selftests), then learning needs to be enabled for the sole reason of
> refreshing the dynamic entries added by user space. That is, updating
> 'fdb->updated' with current jiffies value.
>
> So, is this the requirement? I checked the hostapd fork you posted some
> time ago and I get the impression that the answer is yes [1], but I
> want
> to verify I'm not missing something.
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/westermo/hostapd/commit/95dc96f9e89131b2319f5eae8ae7ac99868b7cd0#diff-338b6fad34b4bdb015d7d96930974bd96796b754257473b6c91527789656d6edR11
>
>

I cannot say that it is a requirement with respect to the bridge
implementation, but it is with the driver implementation. But you are
right that it is to be used with dynamic entries.

>> > # ip link set dev swp1 up
>> > # ip link set dev swp2 up
>> > # ip link set dev br0 up
>> >
>> > 2. Assuming h1 behind swp1 was authorized using 802.1X:
>> >
>> > # bridge fdb replace $H1_MAC dev swp1 master dynamic
>>
>> With the new MAB flag 'replace' is not needed when MAB is not enabled.
>
> Yes, but replace works in both cases.
>

Yes, of course.

>>
>> >
>> > 3. Assuming 802.1X authentication failed for h2 behind swp2, enable MAB:
>> >
>> > # bridge link set dev swp2 mab on
>> >
>> > 4. Assuming $H2_MAC is in our allow list:
>> >
>> > # bridge fdb replace $H2_MAC dev swp2 master dynamic
>> >
>> > Learning is on in order to refresh the dynamic entries that user space
>> > installed.
>>
>> Yes, port association is needed for those reasons. :-)
>
> Given that the current tests use "static" entries that cannot age, is
> there a reason to have "learning on"?
>

Port association is needed for MAB to work at all on mv88e6xxx, but for
802.1X port association is only needed for dynamic ATU entries.

>>
>> >
>> > (*) Need to add support for this option in iproute2. Already exposed
>> > over netlink (see 'IFLA_BR_MULTI_BOOLOPT').
>>
>> Should I do that in this patch set?
>
> No, I'm saying that this option is already exposed over netlink, but
> missing iproute2 support. No kernel changes needed.

Oh yes, I meant in the iproute2 accompanying patch set to this one?