EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
On 1/26/20 4:59 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
Given the design of the protocol, if the hardware decides the OS etc
is dead, it should stop sending MRP_TEST frames and unblock the ports.
If then becomes a 'dumb switch', and for a short time there will be a
broadcast storm. Hopefully one of the other nodes will then take over
the role and block a port.
In my experience a closed loop should never happen. It can makeHaving loops in the network is never a good thing - but to be honest, I
software crash and give other problems. An other node should first
take over before unblocking the ring ports. (If this is possible - I
only follow this discussion halfly)
What is your opinion?
(FYI: I made that mistake once doing a proof-of-concept ring design:I see. It could be fun to see if what we have proposed so far will with
during testing, when a "broken" Ethernet cable was "fixed" I had for a
short time a loop, and then it happened often that that port of the
(Marvell 88E6063) switch was blocked. (To unblock, only solution was
to bring that port down and up again, and then all "lost" packets came
out in a burst.) That problem was caused by flow control (with pause
frames), and disabling flow control fixed it, but flow-control is
default on as far as I know.)