From: Chas Williams <3chas3@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
Chas Williams <chas3@att.com>,
"Wei Hu (Xavier)" <xavier.huwei@huawei.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Aligning DPDK Link bonding with current standards terminology
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 06:03:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e61c70c9-503c-4572-e583-8e62f31aea84@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200615155237.682a89af@hermes.lan>
On 6/15/20 6:52 PM, Stephen Hemminger 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
However, the bonding driver supports more than just the LACP protocol
for managing members of a bond group. I suggest renaming the existing
API that is objectionable and providing the old names for one release.
I will see if I can get a copy of the 802.1AX 2020 revision.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-16 10:03 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 [this message]
2020-06-16 11:48 ` Jay Rolette
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=e61c70c9-503c-4572-e583-8e62f31aea84@gmail.com \
--to=3chas3@gmail.com \
--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).