I'm not sure, but if a user enabled one of them with
*ovs-vsctl set Bridge br0 stp_enable/rstp_enable=true*
and then the other one with
*ovs-vsctl set Bridge br0 rstp_enable/stp_enable=true*
this last command has no effects. See:
static void
> bridge_configure_rstp(struct bridge *br)
> {
> struct ofproto_stp_status stp_status;
> ofproto_get_stp_status(br->ofproto, &stp_status);
> if (!br->cfg->rstp_enable) {
> ofproto_set_rstp(br->ofproto, NULL);
> } else if (stp_status.enabled) {
> /* Do not activate RSTP if STP is enabled. */
> VLOG_ERR("RSTP cannot be enabled if STP is running.");
> ofproto_set_rstp(br->ofproto, NULL);
> ovsrec_bridge_set_rstp_enable(br->cfg, false);
> } else {
If enabling both of them should result in activating RSTP, then some
modifications are needed I think.
Daniele
2015-03-05 18:02 GMT+01:00 Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com>:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 04:00:36PM +0100, Daniele Venturino wrote:
> > > + STP and RSTP are mutually exclusive. If both are
> enabled, RSTP
> > > + will be used.
> >
> >
> > I think this might not be true.
> > If it has not been changed, when STP or RSTP is enabled it should not be
> possible to enable the other one on the same bridge.
> > This is done in bridge_configure_stp() and bridge_configure_rstp() in
> vswitchd/bridge.c.
>
> Do you mean that, if the database enables both STP and RSTP, then which
> one becomes active depends on the order in which they are enabled? If
> so, then we should fix that: Open vSwitch configuration should be a
> function of the database's contents, not of the database's history.
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
