Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2023 15:44:29 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 270559] if_bridge: does not forward packets properly for vlan 1 Message-ID: <bug-270559-7501-stdOTYpxCo@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-270559-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-270559-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D270559 --- Comment #5 from Zhenlei Huang <zlei@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Kristof Provost from comment #4) > I'd expect this to work, because the bridge code does take vlan ID into a= ccount > when it learns addresses. After looked into the code, I think the root cause is that if_bridge(4) tre= at untagged packets as from vlan 1 (the default VID for bridge as 802.1Q-2003 Table 9-2), and untagged packets and that from vlan 1 share the same forwar= ding lookup table. if_bridge(4) will then treat the two host from different broadcast domain as the same one. One possible solution could be treat untagged packets as untagged (or vlan = 0) and tagged as tagged. Although vlan 0 is not valid as per 802.1Q-2003 but it has no side effect if user treat if_bridge(4) as transparent bridge. Actual= ly if_bridge(4) does not function as a full 802.1q aware bridge (I mean it mis= ses policies such as adding tags for inbound and removing tags on outbound or dropping packets with unknown / un-configured tags). > I translated your test into an automated test: https://reviews.freebsd.or= g/D39379 , > but that seems to pass. Did I miss something? I'll comment directly on D39379. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-270559-7501-stdOTYpxCo>