From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com>
To: Tsutomu Fujii <t-fujii@nb.jp.nec.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bonding in active-backup mode with arp monitoring on Xen
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 14:48:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <25246.1193780909@death> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47253487.3010909@nb.jp.nec.com>
Tsutomu Fujii <t-fujii@nb.jp.nec.com> wrote:
[...]
>The network structure is the following.
>
>+-------------------------------+
>| virtual I/F(eth0) | <- have IP address.
>+-------------------------------+
>| virtual bridge(xenbr0) |
>+-------------------------------+
>| bonding(bond0) | <- don't have IP address
>+--------------+-+--------------+
>|phy I/F(peth0)| |phy I/F(peth1)|
>+--------------+ +--------------+
[...]
>How about removing bond_has_ip() from the condition for calling
>bond_arp_send_all() to use bonding with xen?
>When I removed bond_has_ip(), the resulting kernel worked fine and
>active-backup mode works with arp monitoring.
I looked at this a bit. I believe that when you remove the
bond_has_ip() test, the ARP probes sent out will be of the form "ARP
who-has A.B.C.D tell 0.0.0.0", which the linux kernel will interpret as
IPv4 Duplicate Address Detection probes (as a special case in
arp_process()), and generate some type of reply. That reply appears to
be enough to keep the ARP monitor happy.
I'm not sure if this is a solution that will work for any peer
(some peers may not reply to an ARP with an IP source of all zeros). At
first glance, there doesn't seem to be much of a downside, but I'll have
to experiment with it a bit to see if the check should be optional or
simply removed entirely.
-J
---
-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-30 21:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-29 1:16 Bonding in active-backup mode with arp monitoring on Xen Tsutomu Fujii
2007-10-30 21:48 ` Jay Vosburgh [this message]
2007-10-31 11:08 ` Tsutomu Fujii
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-03-27 12:49 Tsutomu Fujii
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=25246.1193780909@death \
--to=fubar@us.ibm.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=t-fujii@nb.jp.nec.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).