DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jay Rolette <rolette@infinite.io>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: Chas Williams <chas3@att.com>,
	"Wei Hu (Xavier)" <xavier.huwei@huawei.com>, DPDK <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Aligning DPDK Link bonding with current standards terminology
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 06:48:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADNuJVokhhg-YvWE6RDovYqvO9Out5FL2PbPyFyhLeeQTm7m=Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200615155237.682a89af@hermes.lan>

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:52 PM Stephen Hemminger <
stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:

> I am disturbed by the wide spread use of master/slave in Ethernet bonding.
> Asked the current IEEE chairs and it looks like it is already fixed
> "upstream".
>
> The proper terminology is for Ethernet link aggregation in the
> the current standard 802.1AX 2020 revision (pay walled) for the parts
> formerly known as master and slave is now "Protocol Parser" and "Protocol
> multiplexer".
>
> Also it is not called bonding anywhere; it uses LACP only.
>

LACP is only 1 of 5 bonding modes.


> Given the large scope of the name changes. Maybe it would be best to just
> convert the names
> all of rte_eth_bond to rte_eth_lacp and fix the master/slave references at
> the same time.
>

Why rename rte_eth_bond at all?


> For one brief release (20.08) keep both drivers and mark the bond on as
> deprecated.
> It would also help if all the documentation and tests were checked to see
> if they
> align with the current standard.
>

The current naming appears to be a straight copy of the Linux naming + a
prefix change.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-06-16 11:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-15 22:52 Stephen Hemminger
2020-06-16 10:03 ` Chas Williams
2020-06-16 11:48 ` Jay Rolette [this message]
2020-06-16 13:52   ` Chas Williams
2020-06-16 15:45     ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-06-16 20:27       ` Chas Williams

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CADNuJVokhhg-YvWE6RDovYqvO9Out5FL2PbPyFyhLeeQTm7m=Q@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=rolette@infinite.io \
    --cc=chas3@att.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=xavier.huwei@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).