netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>
To: Toshiaki Makita <toshiaki.makita1@gmail.com>
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] vlan: Try to adjust lower device mtu when configuring 802.1AD vlans
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 12:44:16 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <533C3E60.8070509@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1396456652.2215.42.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On 04/02/2014 12:37 PM, Toshiaki Makita wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 09:31 -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>> On 04/02/2014 08:21 AM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 05:17:34PM -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>>>> 802.1AD vlans supposed to encapsulate 802.1Q vlans.  To
>>>> do this, we need an extra 4 bytes of header which are typically
>>>> not accounted for by lower devices.  Some devices can not
>>>> support frames longer then 1522 bytes at all.  Such devices
>>>> can not really support 802.1AD, even in software, without
>>>> the vlan reducing its mtu value.
>>>>
>>>> This patch propses to increate the lower devices MTU to 1504
>>>> in case of 802.1AD configuration, and if device doesn't
>>>> support it, fail the creation of the vlan.  The user has an
>>>> option to configure older-style Q-in-Q vlans and manually
>>>> lower the mtu to support such encapsulation.
>>>
>>> I think you should do the opposite. The lower layer device may be used
>>> for other things than the VLAN, so it doesn't seem right to change it's
>>> MTU. Instead I'd propose to set the MTU of the 802.1ad VLAN device to
>>> the lower device'e MTU - 4 unless a MTU has been specified by the user.
>>>
>>
>> The decrease of vlan mtu was my initial take on this as well.  The
>> problematic case with this is forwarding by an encapsulating
>> bridge (bridge that has 802.1AD as one port and ethX as others). The
>> frame from ethX will not fit into the mtu of the vlan device in
>> this case and the packet is dropped.  Ideally, we'd generate and ICMP
>> Too Big, but with the bridge we can't/don't do that.
>>
>> Another problem is that linux assumes that MTU == MRU in case of
>> device receive buffer programming.  Thus, full sized 802.1AD
>> frames transmitted by the switch supporting it will probably get dropped
>> by the driver/firmware as too long.  I've tested this and saw it
>> happen on my systems.
>>
>> An alternative I've thought off is to adjust the rx size in the drivers
>> when 802.1AD is configured, but that touches all the drivers, and
>> doesn't work well for not vlan-filtering drivers.  It needs a new
>> ndo api to adjust the rx length to make it consistent across all
>> devices.
>>
>>> BTW, I couldn't find anything related to MTU handling in the 802.1ad
>>> standard, however I only have an old copy and might have looked in the
>>> wrong place. Do you have any information how this is supposed to be
>>> handled?
>>>
>>
>> The standard doesn't seem to mention anything about it, but looking
>> at switch implementations, most of them require a bump in the mtu to
>> 1504 to support 802.1AD.  Some allow for the decrease in vlan mtu, but
>> that also requires mss translations as well.
> 
> 802.1ad was merged into 802.1Q-2011, and G.2.2 in it refers to maximum
> pdu size. However, this doesn't seem to mention the case where frames
> are double tagged.
> 
> MEF 6.1 requires UNI MTU size >= 1522 and MEF 31 requires E-NNI MTU size
>> = 1526 (In these documents, MTU seems to mean frame size).
> This implies that we should allow 1508 bytes of MTU size when we use
> 802.1AD.
> 

1522 = 1500 + 14 + 4 (.1Q) + 4 (FCS)

> Is 1504 enough?

1526 = 1500 + 14 +4 (.1Q) + 4 (.1AD) + 4(FCS)

This is why Cisco docs recommend mtu of 1504.

Of course this doesn't in any way account for stacked .1AD tags.

-vlad

> 
> Thanks,
> Toshiaki Makita
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-02 17:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-01 21:17 [RFC PATCH] vlan: Try to adjust lower device mtu when configuring 802.1AD vlans Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-01 21:34 ` Florian Fainelli
2014-04-02 12:21 ` Patrick McHardy
2014-04-02 13:31   ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-02 16:37     ` Toshiaki Makita
2014-04-02 16:44       ` Vlad Yasevich [this message]
2014-04-03  8:32         ` Toshiaki Makita
2014-04-03 13:07           ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-04 15:08             ` Toshiaki Makita
2014-04-04 15:22               ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-06 15:21                 ` Toshiaki Makita

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=533C3E60.8070509@redhat.com \
    --to=vyasevic@redhat.com \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=toshiaki.makita1@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).