From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
Cc: Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: GVRP
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 19:43:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <483C482A.3050003@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.1.10.0805271936140.13277@netcore.fi>
Pekka Savola wrote:
> On Tue, 27 May 2008, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> I've written an applicant-only GVRP implementation for the kernel
>> some time ago (for those not familiar: it dynamically registers
>> VLANs with switches. Applicant-only means its only the "client-side")
>> and I'm wondering whether I should merge it. It should be quite
>> easy to move it to userspace, OTOH I think it would be nice to
>> have the client-side support for this without having to install
>> additional daemons. But since this is not a really strong argument,
>> I'd like to hear if anyone has an opinion about this.
>>
>> The GVRP implementation sits on top of an GARP implementation,
>> which could also support GMRP for multicast address registrations.
>>
>> I'm not including the patch yet because it would need to be
>> split up and needs some minor cleanups, just for orientation, the
>> GARP implementation is about 600 lines of simple code, the GVRP
>> implementation something like 60 lines of even simpler code.
>
> If it's simple, why not?
>
> But-- when I was writing RFC 5110 one of the things we evaluated was
> whether an another application of GARP, GMRP, could be used.
>
> We asked IEEE about this and they said that GARP and GMRP are obsolete,
> below is the most important part of RFC 5110 with this respect:
>
> IEEE 802.1D-2004 specification describes Generic Attribute
> Registration Protocol (GARP), and GARP Multicast Registration
> Protocol (GMRP) [GMRP] is a link-layer multicast group application of
> GARP that notifies switches about MAC multicast group memberships.
> If GMRP is used in conjunction with IP multicast, then the GMRP
> registration function would become associated with an IGMP "join".
> However, this GMRP-IGMP association is beyond the scope of GMRP.
> GMRP requires support at the host stack and it has not been widely
> implemented. Further, IEEE 802.1 considers GARP and GMRP obsolete
> being replaced by Multiple Registration Protocol (MRP) and Multicast
> Multiple Registration Protocol (MMRP) that are being specified in
> IEEE 802.1ak [802.1ak]. MMRP is expected to be mainly used between
> bridges. Some further information about GARP/GMRP is also available
> in Appendix B of [RFC3488].
Thanks for the pointer, I'll try to read up on this tommorrow.
If GARP is considered obsolete, I guess there's no point in
merging GVRP.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-27 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-27 16:10 GVRP Patrick McHardy
2008-05-27 16:39 ` GVRP Pekka Savola
2008-05-27 17:43 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
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=483C482A.3050003@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pekkas@netcore.fi \
/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).