lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RESEND PATCH v5] net: bonding: Add support for IPV6 ns/na to balance-alb/balance-tlb mode
Date
孙守鑫 <sunshouxin@chinatelecom.cn> wrote:
[...]
>> As for the RLB functionality (i.e., the balance-alb remote to
>> local load balance), that is not implemented for IPv6 and this patch is
>> not providing an implementation of the RLB logic for IPv6, so I'm
>> unclear why you expect it to work, or what the "mismatch Bond6
>> specification" is.
>>
>> To be clear, implementing RLB for IPv6 would include what this
>> patch is doing (adjusting the content of NS/NA datagrams), but a
>> complete implementation requires additional logic that isn't here, e.g.,
>> adding IPv6 logic to the RLB rebalance code, connecting NS/NA
>> manipulation to rlb_choose_channel(), and likely other things that don't
>> come immediately to mind.
>>
>> In summary, it sounds to me like the actual bug originally
>> reported (with the now-omitted diagram) would be resolved by assigning
>> NS/NA datagrams to the curr_active_slave, and supporting RLB for IPv6 is
>> a larger project than what's provided by this patch. Am I understanding
>> correctly?
>
>
>Thanks your comment.
>For the simplify, I would like to resolve the inconsistent mac at first by
>assigning NS/NA datagrams to the curr_active_slave by V6 soon.
>Supporting RLB for IPv6, it looks like hard a bit and I wonder if we can
>resolve it in another patch?
>any comments?

I'm in agreement that the first step should be solving the
immediate TLB NS/NA problem, and the larger task of implementing RLB for
IPv6 can be done separately.

-J

---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@canonical.com

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-01-17 03:02    [W:0.066 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site