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:	Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:17:17 +0100
From:	Michal Soltys <>
To:	Eric Dumazet <>
CC:	Leonardo Uzcudun <>,
	yao zhao <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: VLAN 1 - Native

On 02.02.2012 10:12, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 09:09 +0000, Leonardo Uzcudun a écrit :
>> Hello Michal:
>> It is working on kernel 3.0.0-15 Ubuntu. I've just to modify the
>> ebtables command as:
>> ebtables -t broute -A BROUTING -i eth0 -p 802_1Q --vlan-id 101 -j DROP
>> (protocol is a must when you use --vlan-id)
>> I'll test it on kernel 2.6.32-5 Debian
>> Just last question,in the case i should implement this kind of
>> configuration in a kernel 2.6.31, should i backport/patch anything? is
>> it a bad idea (running it on 2.6.31)?
> This is going to be tough.

Btw, this (ebtables broute drop) method has been mentioned in bridge-nf 
faq for ages (through most/all 2.6 kernels at least) - and for the very 
purpose of directing tagged/not tagged traffic to proper bridge 
interfaces. Shouldn't 2.6.31 be pretty safe in that regard ?

Or did you mean backporting/patching part ?

> The point of Jesse Gross (and others) work was exactly to permit better
> vlan/bridge integration/stacking.

Just to be sure - are those patches in any way changing / deprecating / 
conflicting with ebtables approach ?

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