From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org  Mon Oct  5 09:45:17 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C14E99AEAF
 for <freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Mon,  5 Oct 2015 09:45:17 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88CFC3C6
 for <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org>; Mon,  5 Oct 2015 09:45:17 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118])
 by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id t959jH8B081224
 for <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:45:17 GMT
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 156226] [lagg]: failover does not announce the failover to switch
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 09:45:17 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System
X-Bugzilla-Component: kern
X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: feature, needs-qa, patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People
X-Bugzilla-Who: eugen@grosbein.net
X-Bugzilla-Status: Open
X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: mfc-stable9? mfc-stable10?
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-156226-2472-XDrea9s410@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-156226-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-156226-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 09:45:17 -0000

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156226

--- Comment #15 from eugen@grosbein.net ---
(In reply to pvz from comment #14)

> the hypothetical but plausible scenario

That's competly real scenario. My FreeBSD-based PPPoE BRAS'es run hundreds of
VLANs over lagg port-channels and each VLAN carries PPPoE frames only, no IP
traffic at all. Of course, I use LACP for failover (and load balancing too).
And LACP does not send its signalling traffic over each vlan (and should not).

Why don't people want to use already invented layer-2 signalling protocols but
try to invent a wheel every time?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.