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

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

Now we have the L2CC working in kernel 2.4.20, the problem was that we =
was
using it in a Non MPLS kernel so the l2ccadm was not working, after some
small modification in the l2ccadmin.c we seceded compiling it and
configuring the cross connection in PC2 interfaces and passing pings =
between
PC1 and PC3.

Now we are in the process of migration of l2cc to kernel 2.6 and =
thinking
about the eth PDU encapsulation.

We are working in this direction, any comment or suggestion will be
appreciated.

Regards,

Diego G.
=20
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Diego G [mailto:die...@ad...]
> Enviado el: martes, 28 de junio de 2005 20:38
> Para: 'mpl...@li...'; =
'jl...@mi...'
> Asunto: RE: [mpls-linux-general] Ethernet over MPLS vs PWe3-rfc3985 =
and
> drafts
>=20
>=20
> First of all, thanks for your fast answer.
>=20
> Now some comments:
>=20
> 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
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
>=20
> Diego G.
>=20
>=20
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: James R. Leu [mailto:jl...@mi...]
> 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
>=20
> Currently ethernet over MPLS forwarding is broken.  But it will not
> take much to fix.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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:
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Diego G.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > 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...
>=20
>