Beautiful.
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 02:30:55PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: > How about this? > > bond: Sending learning packets on active-backup. > > Suppose we have an active bond with two ports, eth1 and eth2, > attached to a standard L2 learning switch which does not know it's > participating in a bond (i.e. isn't running LACP). Suppose eth1 is > active and therefore the L2 learning switch is forwarding traffic > to eth1 as instructed by its learning table. Now suppose, for some > reason, OVS fails over from eth1 to eth2. For each destination > MAC, the L2 learning switch will continue sending traffic to eth1, > which will be dropped, until either traffic from that MAC appears > on eth2, or the learning table entries expire. > > To alleviate this issue, this patch sends learning packets on newly > active interfaces in active-backup bonds in order to educate the > upstream network of the change. > > Requested-by: Frido Roose <fr.ro...@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com> > > Ethan > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 03:51:30PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: > >> When an active-backup bond fails over, it makes sense to update > >> upstream learning tables of the change so that traffic is forwarded > >> to the correct slave. > >> > >> Requested-by: Frido Roose <fr.ro...@gmail.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com> > > > > The patch looks fine but I'd really like a more spelled out rationale > > in the commit message. Otherwise a year from now when I read the > > commit I won't know why it makes sense. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ben. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
