From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 11 08:25:33 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 568A8106564A for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:25:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (glebius.int.ru [81.19.64.117]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D083D8FC0A for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p7B8PV4f012975; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:25:31 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p7B8PVRv012974; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:25:31 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.glebius.int.ru: glebius set sender to glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:25:31 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: Freddie Cash Message-ID: <20110811082531.GR43567@glebius.int.ru> References: <20110810160526.GO43567@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: new CARP implementation X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:25:33 -0000 On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:38:04AM -0700, Freddie Cash wrote: F> However, I'm not sure I understand the reasoning for removing the carpX F> pseudo-interface. It's really nice having the symmetry between carpX, F> vlanX, brX, and other pseudo-interfaces, and keeping the configuration F> details separate from the underlying physical interface. F> F> This now makes creating/configuring CARP different from creating/configuring F> VLANs. :( This is done because VLANs _are_ interfaces, they are tunnels within ethernet interfaces, splitting one interface into a bunch. Bridges are interfaces, as well as LACP trunks (lagg(4)), since they group a number of interfaces into one. CARP addresses _are not_ interfaces, they are addresses. IMHO, implementing them as virtual interface subtly attached to a real one, was a layering violation. -- Totus tuus, Glebius.