netdev - Re: change the way e1000 is handling short VLAN frames

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]

Message-Id: <1190409160.4231.29.camel@localhost>
Date:	Fri, 21 Sep 2007 17:12:40 -0400
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Cc:	Emil Micek <emil.micek@...jasek.cz>,
	"auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>,
	netdev mailing list <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jesse <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
Subject: Re: change the way e1000 is handling short VLAN frames

On Fri, 2007-21-09 at 08:43 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:

> I just re-read the spec, and a bridge *may* pad up to 68, but it is not 
> required.
> On page 166, it says equipment must be able to handle 64 byte minimums.
> 
> See page 22 (section 7.2) of this document:
> 
> http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.1Q-1998.pdf
> 
> Also, page 63, 165, 166

Thanks for the enlightnment. 
Do we need an ethtool interface to turn off hardware accelerated vlans?
Jesse is indicating that the intel hardware can only handle the MUST but
not the SHOULD of the spec.
Actually a more basic question: Can you select one or the other mode in
the software based vlans?

cheers,
jamal


-
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