From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen-netback notify DomU to send ARP. Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:03:03 +0000 Message-ID: <1357732983.7989.251.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> References: <50EC099D.6020407@oracle.com> <50EC297A02000078000B3BB5@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <1357652541.7989.179.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <50EC3DFD.8060206@oracle.com> <1357660834.12649.103.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> <50ECC2C4.5060501@163.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "konrad.wilk@oracle.com" To: Jason Luan Return-path: Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([46.33.159.39]:47271 "EHLO SMTP.EU.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757475Ab3AIMDH (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2013 07:03:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: <50ECC2C4.5060501@163.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 01:07 +0000, Jason Luan wrote: > =E4=BA=8E 2013=E5=B9=B401=E6=9C=8809=E6=97=A5 00:00, Ian Campbell =E5= =86=99=E9=81=93: > > On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 15:40 +0000, jianhai luan wrote: > >> On 2013-1-8 21:42, Ian Campbell wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 13:13 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>>>> On 08.01.13 at 12:57, jianhai luan > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>> When Xen Dom0's network circumstance changed, DomU > >>>>> should be notified in some special condition. For > >>>>> example the below circumstance: > >>>>> ping from Guest A to DomU: > >>>>> Guest A --> eth0 - bond0 - xenbr0 --VIF(DOMU) > >>>>> eth1 / > >>>>> when eth0 inactive, and eth1 active. > >>> How is eth0 failing? Are you unplugging it, un-enslaving it or > >>> taking > >>> some other sort of administrative action? > >> In my emulation environment, i unplug it or ifdown the interface, > > I expect these would behave rather different, since the affect of i= fdown > > looks rather different to an unplug from the PoV of the switch. > > > > Is the ifdown case something which you are trying to solve or just = what > > appeared to be a convenient test case? I'd be less inclined to worr= y > > about explict admin actions such as that. > > > > Unplugging the cable should cause: > > > I do above listed thing to let switch active slave only. > I think that we should put attention on the thing which bond switch=20 > active slave interface in active-backup mode. In network circumstance= ,=20 > many thing will cause the switch, what do Vif when the event happen? Sorry, I'm having a bit of trouble parsing the above, but are you askin= g what the VIF should do when the active slave in the bond changes withou= t the previously active slave actually failing? The issue is that traffic will continue to arrive on the now inactive slave, but will be discarded (the expected behaviour for Active/Passive)? Is this something which happens in practice? Does the active slave change even while it remains a viable path? Ian.