[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100122201331.GA2974@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 09:13:31 +1300
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: VLAN vs bridging receive precedence
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 05:11:42PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
.
> The administrator might just be trying to bridge a VLAN to a guest.
>
> XenCenter attaches a bridge interface ('Network') to each NIC. The
> administrator can define additional Networks which are associated with
> VLANs on specific NICs; for each of these it attaches a VLAN interface
> to the physical interface and a bridge interface to the VLAN interface.
But that should work perfectly. The problem here is that the
bridge is being attached to the physical interface, no?
> Ideally people wouldn't mix tagged and untagged traffic, and then
> XenCenter could refuse to bridge both a physical interface and a VLAN
> attached to it. In practice, people do mix them, and I think we need to
> work out what the proper semantics are.
Mixing should work as well, as long as you don't attach both
bridging and VLAN to the physical interface.
Cheeers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists