Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@waldekranz.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Cc:     davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@nvidia.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@blackwall.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>,
        Cooper Lees <me@cooperlees.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>,
        Matt Johnston <matt@codeconstruct.com.au>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, navolnenoze@simerda.eu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 00/10] net: bridge: Multiple Spanning Trees
In-Reply-To: <20220301162142.2rv23g4cyd2yacbs@skbuf>
References: <20220301100321.951175-1-tobias@waldekranz.com>
 <20220301162142.2rv23g4cyd2yacbs@skbuf>
Date:   Tue, 01 Mar 2022 22:20:30 +0100
Message-ID: <87fso1nzdt.fsf@waldekranz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 18:21, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Tobias,
>
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:03:11AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
>> A proposal for the corresponding iproute2 interface is available here:
>> 
>> https://github.com/wkz/iproute2/tree/mst
>
> Please pardon my ignorance. Is there a user-mode STP protocol application
> that supports MSTP, and that you've tested these patches with?
> I'd like to give it a try.

I see that Stephen has already pointed you to mstpd in a sibling
message.

It is important to note though, that AFAIK mstpd does not actually
support MSTP on a vanilla Linux system. The protocol implementation is
in place, and they have a plugin architecture that makes it easy for people
to hook it up to various userspace SDKs and whatnot, but you can't use
it with a regular bridge.

A colleague of mine has been successfully running a modified version of
mstpd which was tailored for v1 of this series (RFC). But I do not
believe he has had the time to rework it for v2. That should mostly be a
matter of removing code though, as v2 allows you to manage the MSTIs
directly, rather than having to translate it to an associated VLAN.