[Bridge] RE: [PATCH] (3/4) bridge linkstate handling

Eble, Dan DanE at aiinet.com
Thu Jul 29 08:11:02 PDT 2004


> -----Original Message-----
> From: jamal [mailto:hadi at cyberus.ca] 
> 
> On Thu, 2004-07-29 at 09:24, Eble, Dan wrote:
> > Even if STP were implemented in user space, this part 
> should be done in
> > the kernel to make sure that there is no window of time for 
> a packet to
> > be received or transmitted after the link state changes.  
> 
> Your main problem there would be STP convergence time. Transfering the
> packet to user space and reacting should be several factors 
> of magnitude
> faster than it takes STP to converge.
> The STP state should stay in the kernel. Control of it and 
> BPDU handling
> is what i am suggesting to take out.

Is the time it takes STP to converge really the issue in this case?
When a port loses and then regains carrier, it needs to enter the
Blocking state without delay.  If the carrier state change were handled
by a daemon, the bridge driver would have some time to transmit or
receive packets via that port before the daemon could tell it to block
the port, wouldn't it?




More information about the Bridge mailing list