Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next] net/hanic: Add the hanic network interface for high availability links

Ferenc Fejes
2023-02-21T11:03:17Z

Hi!

On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 16:12 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > I guess for the same reason other soft netdevice driver are in the
> > kernel. You can do bridge, bond, etc in a silimilar way you
> > described
> > here...
>
> Performance of tun/tap is also not great.

Yes, but mostly because of the throughput. It also that severe the
latency issue too?

FRER tipically used in TSN use-cases, where 10 and 100 Mbps covers like
90% what you need. 1Gbps at max. Yes I agree that the concept can be
useful everywhere when redundancy over multiple hops necessary but I
cant see other than industrial use-cases (like datacenter or so)

>
> Doing this in the kernel does seem correct. But we need one
> implementation which can be expanded over time to cover everything in
> the standard. From what has been said so far, it seems like this
> implementation focuses on leaf nodes, because that is what the author
> of the code is interested in. But is the design generic enough it can
> be expanded to cover everything else? I'm not saying it actually
> needs
> to implement it now, we just need to have a vision of how it can be
> extended to implement the rest. What we don't want is one way for
> leaf
> nodes, and a completely different code base for other nodes.
>
>        Andrew

I'm afraid not generic enough.
There are MPLS encapsulated DetNet flows as well (PREOF) which is
different than .1CB but replication/elimination concept is the same.
Also it would be nice to have to store the R-tag seq as a metadata and
replicate it in hybrid L2/L3 fashion (TSN and DetNet member streams)

Best,
Ferenc