netdev - Re: Is it valid to add a macvlan virtual interface to a bridge? If so, there seems to be a bug with it.

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:55:25 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	ipng@...06e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Is it valid to add a macvlan virtual interface to a bridge? If
 so, there seems to be a bug with it.

Herbert Xu wrote:
> Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> wrote:
>>> I've had a look at the dev.c file in 2.6.27, and my very naive guess
>>> is that as the handle_bridge() call is before the handle_macvlan() call,
>>> because the incoming real physical interface is not part of the bridge,
>>> the incoming unicast packet is being dropped, before the macvlan code
>>> gets a look at it.
>> Yes, that seems correct.
> 
> Would it be possible to implement promiscuous mode for macvlans by
> simply keeping a separate list of macvlan devices in promiscuous
> mode and sending all inbound packets to them?
> 
> This should make bridging work, right?

I think that should work, at least if we also put the underlying device
in promiscous mode. It wouldn't really be *mac*vlan anymore though :)

I've put it on my TODO list, though I won't be able to take care
of this any time soon.
--
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