Matti Aarnio wrote:
> > > I started work some time ago. It is basically an user space problem.
> >
> > How would it be user-space? Doesn't it aggregate several physical
> > layers together into one interface? That seems like a kernel
> > level thing to me....
>
> Like most of such things, there is the fast-path (of packet
> forwarding), and there is the management protocol.
> (Comparing to 802.1Q, a lot more than half of the specification
> is about the management protocol!)
Likewise with 802.3ad the specification for LACPDU packets is the major
part of the spec, once all of the IEEE requirements stuff is jumped
over.
> It would be nice if we could rid the kernel from routing protocols/
> managing processes, and move all those into appropriate userspace
> daemons. (I mean here 802 spanning-tree bridging, VLAN management,
> IP multicast, etc.)
In that case a logical split for development would be to split off the
link aggregation control to a userland daemon - for those with a copy
of the spec have a look at the diagram on page 97.
As an aside, have the IEEE ever put forward a statement on how much
discussion of their specs is allowed in open forums (I assume the
ethernet and VLAN developments must have come up against this)?
Nick
--
Nick Towers : Systems developer, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College
n.towers@xxxxxxxxxxxx or mailto:ncet@xxxxxxxxxxxx for point and click
If you feel lucky visit my web site - http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ncet/
|