Skip to content
Commit 20263641 authored by Jon Maloy's avatar Jon Maloy Committed by David S. Miller
Browse files

tipc: remove restrictions on node address values



Nominally, TIPC organizes network nodes into a three-level network
hierarchy consisting of the levels 'zone', 'cluster' and 'node'. This
hierarchy is reflected in the node address format, - it is sub-divided
into an 8-bit zone id, and 12 bit cluster id, and a 12-bit node id.

However, the 'zone' and 'cluster' levels have in reality never been
fully implemented,and never will be. The result of this has been
that the first 20 bits the node identity structure have been wasted,
and the usable node identity range within a cluster has been limited
to 12 bits. This is starting to become a problem.

In the following commits, we will need to be able to connect between
nodes which are using the whole 32-bit value space of the node address.
We therefore remove the restrictions on which values can be assigned
to node identity, -it is from now on only a 32-bit integer with no
assumed internal structure.

Isolation between clusters is now achieved only by setting different
values for the 'network id' field used during neighbor discovery, in
practice leading to the latter becoming the new cluster identity.

The rules for accepting discovery requests/responses from neighboring
nodes now become:

- If the user is using legacy address format on both peers, reception
  of discovery messages is subject to the legacy lookup domain check
  in addition to the cluster id check.

- Otherwise, the discovery request/response is always accepted, provided
  both peers have the same network id.

This secures backwards compatibility for users who have been using zone
or cluster identities as cluster separators, instead of the intended
'network id'.

Acked-by: default avatarYing Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarJon Maloy <jon.maloy@ericsson.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
parent b39e465e
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment