[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-bridge
Subject:    Re: [Bridge] looping bridge through vpn - STP question
From:       Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh () gnu ! org>
Date:       2001-05-31 20:13:44
[Download RAW message or body]


On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 04:00:27PM +0200, Mourad De Clerck wrote:

> hi,

Hi,


> now, i want to be able create links from each node to each node, and to 
> do this automatically i am probably going to write some scripts, so that 
> when a node1 connects to node2, node1 would also link up with all the 
> nodes connected to node2. Now, before i do that, i'd like to know that 
> i'm not going to get in trouble with the bridges.
> 
> first: is there a limit on the amount of devices one can bridge 
> together? i always have one physical (eth1) and then a number of tap 
> devices. If i connect ten nodes together, that would mean that each 
> bridge would have ten devices (the physical, plus nine tap devices)

Limit is currently 255 because some port number in the spanning tree protocol
needs to be 8 bit. But I think later versions of the protocol specification
extended this field to 12 bits, so if you need more ports than 255 I'll
probably be able to cook you up a patch.


> second: am i correct in assuming that STP will work out the shortest 
> path?

No. It doesn't.


> Could a switch that doesn't respond to STP at one of the locations 
> be the cause of this?

Nope.


> (i get a lot of br0: retransmitting tcn bpdu messages)

That's interesting. Are all your bridges 2.2.>18/2.4.x machines?


> Any way around it?

Use routing instead of bridging? I don't know how easy it would be to adapt
your specific setup so that routing becomes a possible solution, though.


cheers,
Lennert

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]