netdev - Re: [PATCH 5/6] e1000: Secondary unicast address support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:05:27 -0800
From:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
To:	Krzysztof Oledzki <olel@....pl>
CC:	Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	jeff@...zik.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] e1000: Secondary unicast address support

Krzysztof Oledzki wrote:

> I'm afraid mac-vlans is not a solution here. Having 2x more interfaces 
> (ex. 2000 instead of 1000) makes everything (especially routing, 
> firewalling and QoS) much more complicated. It would be nice to have 
> something like "ip addr add a.b.c.d/24 dev vlan32 hwaddress 
> aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff".

I'll take your word for it, though I have had good luck using mac-vlans
in my own app.  They are nice because the are full-fledged interfaces,
so you can treat them basically as .1q vlans or ethernet devices, including
all the routing and firewalling tricks.

> BTW: is it possible to stack mac-vlans ontop of .1Q vlans?

I believe it will work fine.  You could probably also stack .1q
VLANs on top of mac-vlans so long as you use the same MAC for the VLANs as for
the mac-vlan dev.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html