From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.sandvine.com (Mail1.sandvine.com [64.7.137.134]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C022F2952 for ; Thu, 11 May 2017 22:54:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from BLR-EXCHP-2.sandvine.com (192.168.196.172) by WTL-EXCHP-2.sandvine.com (192.168.194.177) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Thu, 11 May 2017 16:54:53 -0400 Received: from WTL-EXCHP-1.sandvine.com ([fe80::ac6b:cc1e:f2ff:93aa]) by blr-exchp-2.sandvine.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Thu, 11 May 2017 16:54:53 -0400 From: Kyle Larose To: "users@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: active_backup link bonding and mac address Thread-Index: AdLKl+lTdaKL846iTkOMdEwptCqlSg== Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 20:54:52 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.200.51] x-c2processedorg: b2f06e69-072f-40ee-90c5-80a34e700794 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [dpdk-users] active_backup link bonding and mac address X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 20:54:55 -0000 Hey fellow DPDK users, I have a question about the link bond pmd. I am running 4 X710 interfaces in a link bond pmd for my application. In L= ACP mode, everything works fine. But, in active_backup mode, if the primary= link fails, my application stops working. The reason is that I'm still sen= ding packets with the original MAC address of the link bond pmd, which is t= hat of the original primary slave. However, the new primary is not in promi= scuous mode, so traffic coming back with that MAC address drops. What should I be doing here: 1) Should I be listening for the changes in the state of the primary, and u= pdating the MAC address I use to send? (I have it cached for efficiency) 2) Should the driver be placing the interface into promiscuous mode to allo= w for this, similar to what LACP does? 3) Should the driver be overwriting the MAC on egress, similar to what the = tlb driver seems to do (in bond_ethdev_tx_burst_tlb) I'm fine with #1, but it seems to break the goal of having the link bond pm= d be transparent to the application. Thanks, Kyle