[rbridge] Consensus Check: Configure ports to disable end stationtraffic

[Joe Touch]

PS - I do have to admit I don't like optimizations that have silent 
failure modes. I hope we can spend more time focusing on the core 
functionality, and less time on things like this.

Joe

Joe Touch wrote:
> 
> 
> James Carlson wrote:
>> Joe Touch writes:
>>> I'm concerned about the case where an end station moves and doesn't 
>>> announce itself. There's no requirement in ethernet to do so, and 
>>> such a station would never be discovered if we don't flood broadcast 
>>> to all links.
>>>
>>> I.e., the optimization below is a recipe for ARP failure in such 
>>> cases. I disagree with it.
>>
>> That "failure" is exactly the intent.
>>
>> In other words, if you connect an end station to a special internal
>> network that is intentionally designed by a network administrator
>> _not_ to have end stations on it at all (which is what this
>> configuration option specifies), then you've made a mistake, and you
>> should _expect_ the node's attempts to communicate to fail miserably.
>>
>> Obviously, the default should be to forward these messages (ports
>> can't be "TRILL-only" type by default), but why try to prohibit
>> implementations from offering an option if vendors so choose? 
> 
> No reason. This is fine in that case. The doc should be clear about the 
> potential for silent misconfiguration in those cases.
> 
> (note - this is a silent misconfiguration issue; it'd be much easier if 
> we could know that such a misconfiguration would be detectable)
> 
> Joe
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/rbridge/attachments/20080107/def20837/signature.bin