[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=sPp53do6y5-44JUo6jO4YqxnH-U+7ZZPZHm7e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:35:35 +0100
From: richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
To: Phil Karn <karn@...q.net>
Cc: kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Off-by-one error in net/8021q/vlan.c
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Phil Karn <karn@...q.net> wrote:
> On 2/16/11 8:10 AM, richard -rw- weinberger wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Phil Karn <karn@...q.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/16/11 4:51 AM, richard -rw- weinberger wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Phil Karn <karn@...q.net> wrote:
>>>>> The range check on vlan_id in register_vlan_device is off by one, and it
>>>>> prevents the creation of a vlan interface for vlan ID 4095. (OSX allows
>>>>> this, I checked.)
>>>>
>>>> Then OSX should fix their code. 4095 is reserved.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If it's reserved, then it's up to the user to reserve it.
>>
>> No.
>>
>> See:
>> http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.1Q-2005.pdf
>>
>
> Well, then I guess we all know better than the user. That's the Windows
> Way...no, wait, I thought this is Linux.
>
> The fact is that I did encounter a misconfigured switch using vlan 4095,
> and because of this off-by-one error I was unable to talk to it and fix it.
>
> I was hoping I wouldn't have to patch every new kernel I install.
>
The switch violates the standard. Why should Linux also do so?
This would only produce more broken VLANs...
--
Thanks,
//richard
--
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