1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a control packet loop prevention method and a bridge apparatus using the method. More particularly, the present invention relates to a control packet loop prevention method and a bridge apparatus using the method in a network in which node redundancy or circuit redundancy is realized by using RSTP (Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol) or MSTP (Multiple Spanning Tree Protocol).
2. Description of the Related Art
The RSTP (Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol) that is standardized in IEEE 802.1w/1y is a protocol for realizing node redundancy or circuit redundancy in a network using layer 2 switches.
The RSTP is known as a protocol for logically establishing a tee having no loop by using parameters such as bridge priorities and the like that are set in bridges (layer 2 switches). In RSTP, a topology of a network can be switched to a new topology within several seconds when a topology change occurs due to parameter change or due to line failure or the like.
Among the bridges #1-#4, a BPDU (Bridge Protocol Data Unit that is control packet for RSTP) including items shown in
As a port in a bridge, there are three types of ports: a designated port (shows as a black circle in figures), a root port (white circle) and an alternate port (2 lines). The designated port is a port extending from the root bridge side to an end side of a tree. The root port is connected to the designated port and receives a main signal and the BPDU. The alternate port is connected to the designated port, and the alternate port blocks the main signal but receives the BPDU.
The message age in the BPDU shown in
In the RSTP, a tree that does not have any loop as shown in
Japanese Laid Open Patent Application 11-168491 discloses a system having a counter for counting a number of relay frames in which the counter is cleared each time when a BPDU frame is receives, and when the value of the counter becomes larger than a predetermined value, it is judged that a loop occurs so that frame relaying is stopped.
In a network in which four bridges #1-#4 are connected, assuming that the bridge priority of the bridge #1 that is the route bridge is changed from “4096” to “20480”. In this case, strength relationships to other bridges #2-#4 are changed so that a topology change occurs. In the figure, “RBID” indicates a root bridge ID in the BPDU, and MA indicates a message age. The root bridge ID includes the bridge priority of the root bridge and MAC address #1 of the root bridge.
In this case, the bridges #2 and #3 age out (discard) the bridge priority (=4096) of the bridge #1 at the same time, and each bridge updates bridge priority of a root bridge by using a received BPDU, so that a new RSTP tree shown in
However, as a matter of fact, the timing at which the aging out of the bridge priority of the bridge #1 is performed is different between the bridges #2 and #3. Thus, there is a possibility that a BPDU is transmitted among the bridges #2-#4 as if the bridge priority of the bridge #1 remains 4096.
That is, right after the bridge #2 ages out the information, the bridge #2 insists that the bridge #2 itself is the root bridge (2). However, since the bridge #3 has not aged out, the bridge #3 transmits the former bridge priority=4096 of the bridge #1 to the bridge #2 (3). The bridge #2 transfers the bridge priority to a neighboring bridge (4).
Thus, the priority is transferred to the bridges #3, #2, #4 and then #3. At this time, as shown in
The looping BPDU continues to exist as long as the message age value in the BPDU is equal to or smaller than the max age value. Thus, for example, since a default max age is 20, the looping BPDU continues to exist while the BPDU is being transferred through 20 bridges at the maximum. That is, the looping BPDU exists for more than 10 seconds.
The above-mentioned explanation is based on a case where there is one loop for the sake of simplicity. If there are a plurality of loops, the above-mentioned operations are intertwined with each other, so that there is a possibility that it may take several minutes at the maximum until the looping BPDU disappears after a bridge priority change is performed. For example, also in the case shown in
In this case, since a new RSTP tree is constructed after the BPDU having the bridge priority 4096 of the bridge #1 disappears, it may take several minutes at the maximum to generate a new tree. Off course, the main signal is disconnected for the same time interval as the tree reconstructing time.
This phenomenon may occur not only when the bridge priority is changed but also when a node failure (failure of BPDU sending function and the like) in the root bridge #1 occurs. In addition, this phenomenon may occur for MSTP defined in IEEE802.1s in the same way.
An object of the present invention is to provide a control packet loop prevention method and a bridge apparatus using the method for preventing a loop of the control packet so as to decrease the time for switching a tree, decrease the disconnected time of the main signal and prevent a loop of the main signal.
The above-object is achieved by a method for preventing a control packet loop in a network realizing node redundancy or circuit redundancy based on a rapid spanning tree protocol or a multiple spanning tree protocol, the method including the steps of:
detecting a loop of a control packet of the rapid spanning tree protocol or the multiple spanning tree protocol; and
discarding the control packet by which the loop is detected so as to prevent occurrence of the loop of the control packet.
The above-object is also achieved by a bridge apparatus for preventing a control packet loop in a network realizing node redundancy or circuit redundancy based on a rapid spanning tree protocol or a multiple spanning tree protocol, the method including the steps of:
a loop detection part for detecting a loop of a control packet of the rapid spanning tree protocol or the multiple spanning tree protocol; and
a control loop discarding part for discarding the control packet by which the loop is detected.
The bridge apparatus may be connected to a root bridge, and the control message is received after the bridge apparatus ages out information of the root bridge, wherein, the loop detection part detects the loop of the control packet on condition that a root bridge priority and a root bridge address included in the control packet are the same as a priority and an address of the root bridge and that a message age in the control packet is not 0.
In the bridge apparatus, when a priority of the bridge apparatus that is a root bridge is changed, the loop detection part detects the loop of the control packet on condition that a root bridge address included in the control packet is the same as an address of the bridge apparatus and that a root bridge priority included in the control packet is different from the changed priority of the bridge apparatus.
In the bridge apparatus, the loop detection part may detect the loop by using the control packet that is received within a predetermined time period after aging out the information.
According to the present invention, occurrence of a loop of the control packet can be prevented so that the time for switching a tree and the disconnecting time of the main signal can be decreased. In addition, a loop of the main signal can be prevented.
Other objects, features and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent from the following detailed description when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:
In the following, embodiments of the present invention are described.
In the present invention, a received BPDU that causes a BPDU loop is detected. Then, the BPDU that may cause a loop is discarded to prevent the BPDU from being transferred to other bridge. Accordingly, any BPDU loop does not occur and reconstruction of a tree can be performed for several seconds.
More specifically, a bridge connected to a root bridge determines that a BPDU loop occurs if a root bridge ID (bridge priority of a root bridge and the MAC address of a root bridge) in a BPDU received after aging out is the same as a root bridge ID before aging out and if the message age is not 0. Then, the received BPDU is discarded.
Since a root bridge transmits a BPDU with message age=0, it can be determined that a root bridge other than a former root bridge (root bridge before topology change) transfers the BPDU if the message age is not 0.
In a network in which four bridges (layer 2 switches) #1-#4 are connected as shown in
In the figure, RBID indicates a root bridge ID in a BPDU, and MA indicates a message age. The root bridge ID includes a bridge priority (4096 and the like) of a root bridge and a MAC address (#1 and the like) of the root bridge.
Right after the bridge #2 ages out, as shown in
In each bridge, if a bridge priority of a received BPDU is smaller than a bridge priority of a root bridge stored in the own bridge, the bridge immediately ages out the information. However, if the bridge priority of a received BPDU is larger than a bridge priority of a root bridge stored in the own bridge, the bridge waits for a time three times larger than the hello time before aging out. In the meantime of the waiting, the bridge is waiting for receiving a BPDU having a smaller bridge priority that that stored in the own bridge as a bridge priority of a root bridge. The timing for aging out is different among bridges due to difference of BPDU sending timing in each port in the root bridge and due to error in timers in the bridges that detect aging out.
The bridge #2 that receives the BPDU transmitted in (3) determines that a BPDU loop occurs since it is not normal to receive the BPDU with the root bridge ID=4096#1 and message age≠0 after aging out the former root bridge priority. Then, the bridge #2 discards the BPDU.
Accordingly, it becomes possible to prevent a BPDU loop from continuing and enlarging. As a result, it becomes possible to construct a new tree by using STP parameters in each bridge for several seconds. That is, the state changes from
The CPU 14 receives a BPDU from each of the input port circuits 121˜12m so as to perform RSTP processing. A new BPDU generated in the CPU 14 is provided to an output port circuit in output port circuits 181˜18n. The switch part 16 receives the main signal from each of the input port circuits 121˜12m and performs switching processes. Switched main signals are provided to each of the output port circuits 181˜18n. A BPDU inserting part 19 in each of the output port circuits 181˜18n inserts the BPDU sent from the CPU 14 into the main signal sent from the switch part 16, and outputs the main signal over the network.
The BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 holds a root bridge ID before aging out. After the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 is notified of aging out from the age out detection part 24, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 performs BPDU loop detection process by comparing each root bridge ID in BPDUs provided from the input port circuits 121˜12m with the holding root bridge ID before aging out. If the BPDU loop is detected, the received BPDU is discarded. A BPDU by which the BPDU loop is not detected is provided to a root bridge determining part 26 and to a BPDU generation part 28 in the RSTP tree calculation part 22. All BPDUs provided before aging out are sent to the root bridge determination part 24 and to the BPDU generation part 28.
If the age out detection part 24 determines that a bridge priority of the received BPDU is smaller than a bridge priority of the root bridge held in the own bridge apparatus, the age out detection part 24 immediately detects aging out. If the age out detection part 24 determines that a bridge priority of the received BPDU is larger than a bridge priority of the root bridge held in the own bridge apparatus, the age out detection part 24 waits for a time period three times longer than the hello time. After that, the age out detection part 24 detects aging out, and provides a result of the aging out detection to each of the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 and the root bridge determination part 26.
When the root bridge determination part 26 is notified of aging out by the age out detection part 24, the root bridge determination part 26 performs update of the root bridge. In the update of root bridge, the root bridge determination part 26 updates a current root bridge to a new root bridge that is indicated by a root bridge ID of the BPDU provided from the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20. Then, the root bridge determination part 26 recalculates a RSTP tree on the basis of the new root bridge. The root bridge determination part 26 sends a result of the calculation to the BPDU generation part 28. The BPDU generation part 28 generates a BPDU to be used for transmitting the calculation result to each bridge that is connected to the own bridge, and provides the BPDU to each of the output port circuits 181˜18n to which the bridges are connected.
This procedure starts when the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 is notified of aging out from the age out detection part 24.
In the figure, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 receives a BPDU provided from one of the input port circuits 121˜12m in step S10. Then, in step S12, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 determines whether a root bridge ID in the received BPDU is the same as a root bridge ID before aging out that is held by the own bridge in step S12.
If they are the same, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 determines whether the message age in the received BPDU is 0 in step S14. If the message age is not 0 so that it can be determined that a bridge other than the former root bridge transferred the BPDU, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 discards the BPDU since it is determined that a BPDU loop occurs in step S16.
On the other hand, if the root bridge IDs are different or if the message age is 0, since the BPDU loop does not occur, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 provides the BPDU to the root bridge determination part 26 in step S18.
After that, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 determines whether a predetermined time (several second to more than ten seconds, for example) has elapsed after the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 is notified of aging out in step S20. If the predetermined time has not elapsed, the process goes to the step S10. When the predetermined time has elapsed, this process ends. The reason for setting the predetermined time is that the BPDU loop occurs only within the predetermined time right after the aging out occurs.
The path cost is always 0 in a BPDU output from a root bridge, and a value is added to the path cost each time the BPDU is transferred by a bridge. Therefore, it can be determined whether the BPDU has passed through a bridge other than a root bridge. That is, if the path cost is not 0, it can be determined that the BPDU is one transferred from a bridge other than the root bridge.
In a network configuration shown in
Like the message age, if the network configuration is known, the value of the path cost in a BPDU transferred from bridges other than the former root bridge #1 is predetermined. Therefore, it can be determined whether the path cost is a predetermined value in step S24 instead of the message age.
Further, in a network configuration shown in
Further, in step S14, for example, conditions may be combined in which the process goes to the step S18 if the message age is 0 and if the path cost is 0.
In the figure, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 receives a BPDU provided from an input port circuit in step S30. Then, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 determines whether a MAC address in a root bridge ID in the received BPDU is the same as a MAC address of the own apparatus and determines whether a bridge priority in the root bridge ID is the same as the bridge priority of the own bridge.
If the MAC address in the root bridge ID in the received BPDU is the same as the MAC address of the own apparatus and if the bridge priority in the root bridge ID in the received BPDU is not the same as one of the own bridge, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 determines that a BPDU loop occurs and discards the BPDU.
In other cases, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 provides the BPDU to the root bridge determination part 26 in step S36 since the BPDU loop does not exist.
After that, it is determined whether a predetermined time (several seconds to more than ten seconds) has elapsed after the bridge priority of the own bridge is changed in step S38. If the predetermined time has not been elapsed, the process goes to step S30, and after the predetermined time elapses, the process ends.
If a bridge that was a root bridge until the topology was changed is included, as shown in
In the case shown in
As shown in
As shown in
Like the case of the message age, since the path cost of the BPDU sent from a bridge other than the former root bridge #1 can be determined according to the network configuration, the BPDU loop detection/filter part 20 may determine whether the path cost is the predetermined value in step S44.
Further, in step S44, the conditions can be combined in which the process goes to step S36 if the message age is 0 and if the path cost is 0.
Although RSTP is taken an example in the above-mentioned embodiments, the present invention can be also applied to MSTP.
The present invention is not limited to the specifically disclosed embodiments, and variations and modifications may be made without departing from the scope of the present invention.
The present application contains subject matter related to Japanese patent application No. 2004-203674, filed in the JPO on Jul. 9, 2004, the entire contents of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2004-203674 | Jul 2004 | JP | national |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5150360 | Perlman et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5260945 | Rodeheffer | Nov 1993 | A |
5331637 | Francis et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5394436 | Meier et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5734824 | Choi | Mar 1998 | A |
5805805 | Civanlar et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5818842 | Burwell et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
6032194 | Gai et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6115378 | Hendel et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6262977 | Seaman et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6330229 | Jain et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6374311 | Mahany et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6388995 | Gai et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6456597 | Bare | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6473403 | Bare | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6493318 | Bare | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6515969 | Smith | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6519213 | Song et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6535490 | Jain | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6535491 | Gai et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6556541 | Bare | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6577600 | Bare | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6580715 | Bare | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6584080 | Ganz et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6611502 | Seaman | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6628624 | Mahajan et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6650646 | Galway et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6680917 | Seaman | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6697339 | Jain | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6717922 | Hsu et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6865160 | Bare | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6882630 | Seaman | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6937576 | Di Benedetto et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6947384 | Bare | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6963575 | Sistanizadeh et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6976088 | Gai et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7016336 | Sorensen | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7020139 | Kalkunte et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7061875 | Portolani et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7061876 | Ambe | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7089335 | Aiken et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7103008 | Greenblat et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7154861 | Merchant et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7209435 | Kuo et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7283476 | Bare | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7292581 | Finn | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7301912 | Hong et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7327688 | Burwell et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7330440 | Bryant et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7362709 | Hui et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7408883 | Deragon et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7430164 | Bare | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7480258 | Shuen et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7558205 | Moncada-Elias et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7564858 | Moncada-Elias et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7577106 | Shand et al. | Aug 2009 | B1 |
7586856 | Thottakkara et al. | Sep 2009 | B1 |
7596101 | Oguchi | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7706364 | Smith et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7710957 | Smith | May 2010 | B2 |
7852772 | Filsfils et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7855953 | Filsfils et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7864669 | Bonaventure et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7872992 | Ukita et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7877483 | Finn | Jan 2011 | B1 |
8462668 | Kuo et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
20020023170 | Seaman et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020052936 | Gai et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020147800 | Gai et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030016624 | Bare | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030026268 | Navas | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030142680 | Oguchi | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030142685 | Bare | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030165119 | Hsu et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030172257 | Greenblat et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030179707 | Bare | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030189940 | Greenblat | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030191862 | Greenblat | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195989 | Greenblat | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195990 | Greenblat | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195991 | Masel et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200342 | Greenblat et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200343 | Greenblat et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030204636 | Greenblat et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030208618 | Mor et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040090926 | Hong et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040105455 | Seaman | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040131064 | Burwell et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040179524 | Sasagawa et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040223503 | Lynch et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040252634 | Regan et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050076140 | Fung | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050249123 | Finn | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050259646 | Smith et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050259649 | Smith | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060007869 | Hirota et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060013141 | Mutoh et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060013210 | Bordogna et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060045021 | Deragon et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20070091793 | Filsfils et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070091794 | Filsfils et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070091795 | Bonaventure et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070091796 | Filsfils et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20080002669 | O'Brien et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20090238196 | Ukita et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090274153 | Kuo et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20110145433 | Noel et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
11-168491 | Jun 1999 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20060007869 A1 | Jan 2006 | US |