svn commit: r292379 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6

[Steven Hartland]

On 17/12/2015 19:20, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
>    Steven,
>
> another feasible solution for the design described in the 156226
> would be to run STP on the switches, and if_bridge(4) instead of
> if_lagg(4) on FreeBSD, also with STP enabled. Would work perfectly.
>
> Of course, if switches are dumb and cheap, and can't do STP,
> then a tiny bpf-writer is the right solution.
>
> P.S. When I was running network in my university dormitory, we
> used a lot of cheap solutions, and a lot of dirty workarounds,
> but none of the latter made its way to FreeBSD kernel. You can
> also ask Eugene Grosbein, he also has huge experience of living
> on not so pleasant workarounds, but not pushing them agrressively
> into the kernel.
>
Last time I heard STP is a bad word in networking, so I'm sure they 
network team
would have me crucified for even suggesting it and start shouting MLAG 
for the
rest of the day ;-)

     Regards
     Steve