Re: [Anima] ANIMA when there is a system-wide issue

Michael Richardson <> Tue, 23 February 2021 22:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FCF03A0E8E for <>; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 14:54:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XogzWQBI1iJK for <>; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 14:53:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D03383A0E8A for <>; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 14:53:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41983389D5; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:58:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ([]) by localhost (localhost []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id dNnHFzWdBBc8; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:58:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9841C389D0; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:58:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 009E29A8; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:53:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <>
To: Toerless Eckert <>
cc: Anima WG <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <17274.1611866107@localhost> <> <18842.1613083225@localhost> <> <4218.1613756735@localhost> <>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:53:54 -0500
Message-ID: <1900.1614120834@localhost>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Anima] ANIMA when there is a system-wide issue
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2021 22:54:00 -0000

Toerless Eckert <> wrote:
    >> Yes, that's a different problem, but I agree it is related.
    >> For the L2 SDN that does not use STP because it does not want blocked
    >> ports, but rather wants to use all the bandwidth, the problem is keep
    >> the ACP DULL multicast from causing loops.

    > Uhmm.. not clar. Forget ACP DULL... You have an ethernet without STP
    > but with rdundant paths. How do you avoid loops ? Do you use one of the
    > IEEE SPF alternatives to STP ?

Yes, maybe one of the alternatives, maybe because some SDN controller deals
with updating the right forwarding tables.

    > Last time i checked OpenBMC git was very confusing, seemed like mostly
    > facebook internal adoption, but couldn't figure out any option i could
    > easily buy individually as an experimentation platform.

Well, there is significant progress.  But you are right: it is hard to find
actual hardware you can run it on without working for the hardware company.
But, that's because of TPM mechansim.
I also notice how hard it is to run alternate firmware on Cisco/Junipier/Huawei/etc.

    >> One might still want the ACP running even if the context of a BMC user
    >> who shoots eirself in the foot.  The Linux kernel gives one the
    >> "macvlan" which is effectively a kind of bridge (actually mutually
    >> exclusive with being in the a bridge).  The macvlan gets a kernel
    >> allocated randomized mac address, and can be moved into a network
    >> namespace and effectively hidden, however, there does not seem to be a
    >> way to keep the physical interface from being marked down.

    > Right. Ideally you would have SrIOV to create a PCI-bus level disjoint
    > ethernet interface for the ACP. Alas, today, like MacSEC this is an
    > option only on high-end Ethernet PCI controllers. Or else you have to
    > much around in he linux kernel to create protectiona against unintended
    > shutdowns.

Yes, so there are issues.

    tte> Need to read through EAP over Ethernet to check what we could
    tte> share. I forgot all about it.  But ultimatly, its going to be a
    tte> small "selector-header" on top of the new ethertype that we need to
    tte> define.
    >> You want chapter 11 of 802.1X-2020.  Table 11-3 lists the 9 EAPOL
    >> types used.  No equivalent to IANA Consideratons exist, so I think
    >> that it would require a revision by the IEEE to allocate a code.  That
    >> would really be enough.

    > Right. I didn't mean to use EAPOL. I meant to document all the
    > arguments why NOT to use it, but then also reuse all the reuseable
    > ideas that we need.


Michael Richardson <>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide