From: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>
To: Sun Paul <paulrbk@gmail.com>, David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org,
Karl Heiss <kheiss@gmail.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Supporting 4 way connections in LKSCTP
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 13:15:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <529F7150.8080604@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFXGftJsVzR8XgdEmcRKP8DePZoF+xGbaeS-RPgr2XNo7snF3g@mail.gmail.com>
On 12/04/2013 12:57 PM, Sun Paul wrote:
> As I know, the A to C and A to D case must have a router in between to form
> SCTP multihome topology.
Not necessary. I've produced proper multihoming topologies with just
VLANs and different subnet assignment. You can even remove VLANs
if you correctly set your arp_ignore and arp_announce values.
-vlad
> On Dec 4, 2013 10:51 PM, "David Laight" <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
>
>>>> In normal operation, IP-A sends INIT to IP-X, IP-X returns INIT_ACK to
>>>> IP-A. IP-A then sends HB to IP-X, IP-X then returns HB_ACK to IP-A. In
>>>> the meantime, IP-B sends HB to IP-Y and IPY returns HB_ACK.
>>>>
>>>> In case of the path between IP-A and IP-X is broken, IP-B sends INIT
>>>> to IP-X, NODE-B uses IP-Y to return INIT_ACK to IP-B. Then IP-B sends
>>>> HB to IP-X, and IP-Y returns HB_ACK to IP-B. In the meantime, the HB
>>>> communication between IP-B and IP-Y follows the normal flow.
>>>>
>>>> Can I confirm, is it really valid?
>>>
>>> As long as NODE-B knows about both IP-A and IP-B, and NODE-A knows about
>>> both IP-X and IP-Y (meaning all the addresses were exchanged inside INIT
>>> and INIT-ACK), then this situation is perfectly valid. In fact, this
>>> has been tested an multiple interops.
>>
>> There are some network configurations that do cause problems.
>> Consider 4 systems with 3 LAN segments:
>> A) 10.10.10.1 on LAN X and 192.168.1.1 on LAN Y.
>> B) 10.10.10.2 on LAN X and 192.168.1.2 on LAN Y.
>> C) 10.10.10.3 on LAN X.
>> D) 10.10.10.4 on LAN X and 192.168.1.2 on LAN Z.
>> There are no routers between the networks (and none of the systems
>> are running IP forwarding).
>>
>> If A connects to B everything is fine - traffic can use either LAN.
>>
>> Connections from A to C are problematic if C tries to send anything
>> (except a HB) to 192.168.1.1 before receiving a HB response.
>> One of the SCTP stacks we've used did send messages to an
>> inappropriate address, but I've forgotten which one.
>>
>> Connections between A and D fail unless the HB errors A receives
>> for 192.168.1.2 are ignored.
>>
>> Of course the application could explicitly bind to only the 10.x address
>> but that requires the application know the exact network topology
>> and may be difficult for incoming calls.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-04 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-26 1:03 Supporting 4 way connections in LKSCTP Sun Paul
2013-11-26 15:19 ` Vlad Yasevich
[not found] ` <CAFXGftLsKm9a5bmXX4Fe+rnSvYVdBDOyYGwisRP7XMu+ky=DGw@mail.gmail.com>
2013-11-26 23:10 ` Sun Paul
2013-11-27 12:45 ` Neil Horman
2013-11-28 4:03 ` Sun Paul
2013-12-02 14:38 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-02 15:45 ` Karl Heiss
2013-12-02 16:42 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-02 17:10 ` Karl Heiss
2013-12-03 1:31 ` Sun Paul
2013-12-03 1:39 ` Sun Paul
2013-12-03 2:03 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-03 2:19 ` Sun Paul
2013-12-03 12:32 ` Vlad Yasevich
[not found] ` <CAFXGftK5tz90OzObiV7Hi+g080j3zWCNdo217C KdNkOY4JWQUg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAFXGftK5tz90OzObiV7Hi+g080j3zWCNdo217CKdNkOY4JWQUg@mail.gmail.com>
2013-12-03 15:22 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-04 1:59 ` Sun Paul
2013-12-04 14:16 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-04 14:50 ` David Laight
2013-12-04 15:41 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-04 16:01 ` Michael Tuexen
2013-12-04 16:12 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-04 16:25 ` Michael Tuexen
2013-12-04 18:23 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-04 19:39 ` Michael Tuexen
2013-12-05 9:35 ` David Laight
2013-12-05 13:07 ` Michael Tuexen
2013-12-04 16:48 ` David Laight
2013-12-04 17:06 ` Michael Tuexen
2013-12-04 16:12 ` David Laight
[not found] ` <CAFXGftJsVzR8XgdEmcRKP8DePZoF+xGbaeS-RPgr2XNo7snF3g@mail.gmail.com>
2013-12-04 18:15 ` Vlad Yasevich [this message]
2013-12-03 2:02 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-12-03 2:21 ` Sun Paul
2013-12-06 2:12 ` Sun Paul
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=529F7150.8080604@gmail.com \
--to=vyasevich@gmail.com \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=kheiss@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=paulrbk@gmail.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).