RE: [mpls-linux-general] Ethernet over MPLS vs PWe3-rfc3985 and drafts

[Diego G <die...@ad...>]

First of all, thanks for your fast answer.

Now some comments:

1) Regarding the l2cc, we installed it successfully in a kernel 2.4.20 =
but
didn't work (no ping between PC1 and PC3) with the following setup:
PC1 -- PC2 -- PC3=20
eth0 PC1: 192.168.10.1
eht0 PC2: 192.168.20.1
eth1 PC2: 192.168.30.1
eth0 PC3: 192.168.10.2
=20
The l2cc was installed in PC2 and we mapped eth0 to eth1 and eth1 to =
eth0
(l2ccadm -a -i eth0 -o eth1, l2ccadm -a -i eth1 -o eth0).
We will continue investigating was is going on with this setup, seems =
like
the interfaces in PC2 are not working in promiscuous mode so from my =
point
of view traffic from PC1 to PC3 will not be received by PC2 interfaces.

2) If we succeed testing the l2cc in kernel 2.4 we will continue with =
the
migration of the l2cc patch to kernel 2.6.

3) In order to continue this is our plan:
At the beginning we will keep all the signalling issues out of the scope =
of
our implementation. So we will be focused in local cross connect and L2 =
PDU
encapsulation. As far I understand the cross connect issue should be =
solved
with l2cc (migrating it to kernel 2.6) or with the new tc_actions so our
main work will be done in the L2 PDU encapsulation. If we succeed to =
finish
it, we will start with the signalling for Martini style PW.

Let us know if you think we are in the right direction. All comment =
and/or
suggestion are welcome. Just for your knowledge we have good background =
in
communications but we are missing programming experience.


Diego G.
=20

-----Mensaje original-----
De: James R. Leu [mailto:jl...@mi...]=20
Enviado el: jueves, 23 de junio de 2005 11:23
Para: die...@ad...
CC: mpl...@li...
Asunto: Re: [mpls-linux-general] Ethernet over MPLS vs PWe3-rfc3985 and
drafts

Currently ethernet over MPLS forwarding is broken.  But it will not
take much to fix.

I have another project which aims to provide a generic layer 2 cross =
connect
framework for the linux kernel.  The project hasn't received much =
attention
because I've been busy working on mpls-linux.  The last patch from the =
l2cc
project provided a mechanism to specify any frame interface (ethernet, =
VLAN,
PPP, GRE) and redirect frames arriving at the interface to another =
interface
or on to a LSP.  The implementation is very straight forward and easy to
extend.
My guess is that you would not have too much difficulty applying that =
patch
to a recent 2.6 kernel.

One thing to note is that the recent 'tc action' work in the 2.6.11 and
2.6.12 kernel might provide a better infrastructure to do the same thing
as my l2cc patch.  You would have to add some new 'actions', but that =
should
be fairly straight forward.

As far as the signaling side, there does not exist a working =
implementation.
I have added the encode and decode functions for martini style signaling
(via LDP) but none of the internals have been implemented.  I have the
beginning
of a l2-circuit configuration and infrastructure for quagga, but it is =
not
complete.

So the long and the short of it is that there is plenty of room for
improvement in this area.  Let me know where you want to start and I =
will
be happy to point you in the right direction and answer questions.

On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 08:23:55PM -0300, die...@ad...
wrote:
> We are working in a telecommunication degree project and we aims to
develop
> some additional feature to the patch.
> The last couple of month we were studying Linux kernel networking =
stack
implementation
> for kernel 2.6 and the MPLS code itself.
> At this point we decided to add some features to the Ethernet over =
MPLS
support
> so we need some clarification in this regards:
>=20
> 1)What is the meaning of the current ?Ethernet over MPLS support? in =
the
> patch? Is it the tunnels implementation, and the meaning of the =
tunnels
are
> that an Ethernet frame will pass through an MPLS network in a =
transparent
> basis (just like in L2 switching )?
> 2)Is there some implementation of PWe3-RFC3985 included in the patch
and/or
> VPLS? If not, will it be something interesting to add as a feature in =
the
> current implementation?
> 3) Someone else is working on that?
>=20
> Thanks,=20
> =20
> Diego G.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id=16492&op?k
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

--=20
James R. Leu
jl...@mi...