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  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:	Sat, 23 Jan 2010 09:13:31 +1300
From:	Herbert Xu <>
To:	Ben Hutchings <>
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.

Visit Openswan at
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <>
Home Page:
PGP Key:
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists