From: Chas Williams <3chas3@gmail.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Aligning DPDK Link bonding with current standards terminology
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:52:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d935b27a-981c-8f7f-39eb-31991ace4f12@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADNuJVokhhg-YvWE6RDovYqvO9Out5FL2PbPyFyhLeeQTm7m=Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 6/16/20 7:48 AM, Jay Rolette wrote:
> 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?
If there is a strong desire to rename the PMD, I suggest using link
aggregration group (LAG/lag) since that is a more accurate description of
this feature. That's the terminology used in 802.1AX. This would make
some of the internal name changes more natural as well.
>
>
>> 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.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-16 13:52 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
2020-06-16 13:52 ` Chas Williams [this message]
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=d935b27a-981c-8f7f-39eb-31991ace4f12@gmail.com \
--to=3chas3@gmail.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
/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).