Re: [Discuss] ARP monitor for OVS bridge over bonding

[Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 09:36:13AM -0700, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> >
> >The br-ex is not upper link of bond0. ovs-system, instead, is the master
> >of bond0. This make us unable to make sure the br-ex and bond0 is in the
> >same datapath.
> 
> 	I'm guessing that this is in the context of an openstack
> deployment, as "br-ex" and "br-int" are names commonly chosen for the
> OVS bridges in openstack.

It's on a OCP (OpenShift Container Platform) that build with OVN Kubernetes.
> 
> 	But, yes, OVS bridge configuration is very different from the
> linux bridge, and the ARP monitor was not designed with OVS in mind.
> 
> 	I'll also point out that OVS has its own bonding, although it
> does not implement functionality equivalent to the ARP monitor.
> 
> 	However, OVS does provide an implementation of RFC 5880 BFD
> (Bidirectional Forwarding Detection).  The openstack deployments that
> I'm familiar with typically use the kernel bonding in LACP mode along
> with BFD.  Is there a reason that OVS + BFD is unsuitable for your
> purposes?

LACP need switch config. While arp monitor doesn't need any switch config.

> 	A single "arp_src_iface" parameter won't scale if there are
> multiple ARP targets, as each target might need a different
> "arp_src_iface."
> 
> 	Also, the original purpose of bond_verify_device_path() is to
> return VLAN tags in the device stack so that the ARP will be properly
> tagged.

Ah, yes, makes sense.

> 
> 	I think what you're really asking for is a "I know what I'm
> doing" option to bypass the checks in bond_arp_send_all().  That would
> also skip the VLAN tag search, so it's not necessarily a perfect
> solution.

Yes.
 
> 	Before considering such a change, I'd like to know why OVS + BFD
> over a kernel bond attached to the OVS bridge is unsuitable for your use
> case, as that's a common configuration I've seen with OVS.

As upper comment, this need switch config.

Thanks
Hangbin