From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bridge: allow receiption on disabled port Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 13:36:46 -0700 Message-ID: <20131010133646.1bdd42c1@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> References: <1381409570-1892-1-git-send-email-nbd@openwrt.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Felix Fietkau Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.220.51]:45925 "EHLO mail-pa0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755931Ab3JJUgu (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:36:50 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id kp14so3323222pab.10 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 13:36:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1381409570-1892-1-git-send-email-nbd@openwrt.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:52:50 +0200 Felix Fietkau wrote: > When an ethernet device is enslaved to a bridge, and the bridge STP > detects loss of carrier (or operational state down), then normally > packet receiption is blocked. > > This breaks control applications like WPA which maybe expecting to > receive packets to negotiate to bring link up. The bridge needs to > block forwarding packets from these disabled ports, but there is no > hard requirement to not allow local packet delivery. > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger > Signed-off-by: Felix Fietkau No. This will cause duplicate packets to be delivered. If doing a link layer protocol like WPA then it should be done directly on the underlying device, not the bridge itself.