From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 15 09:13:24 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4038916A400
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:13:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su)
Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (comp.chem.msu.su [158.250.32.97])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969A013C428
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:13:17 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su)
Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by comp.chem.msu.su (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l1F9DAgP025868;
	Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:13:10 +0300 (MSK)
	(envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su)
Received: (from yar@localhost)
	by comp.chem.msu.su (8.13.4/8.13.3/Submit) id l1F9D9HY025867;
	Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:13:09 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from yar)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:13:09 +0300
From: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su>
To: Bruce M Simpson <bms@incunabulum.net>
Message-ID: <20070215091309.GC20957@comp.chem.msu.su>
References: <45D38AC9.50107@incunabulum.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <45D38AC9.50107@incunabulum.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Updated 802.1p/q patch
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:13:24 -0000

On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 10:18:49PM +0000, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> 
> What has not been tested or considered is the situation where we have
> nested VLANs. At least one individual has asked about this feature. At
> the moment, I'd suggest that only Netgraph potentially deals with this
> rather than the main network stack.

Do you have any architectural reservations about nested VLANs in
the main network stack?  Presently, a one-line patch can allow a
vlan(4) to attach to another vlan(4), but I haven't heard about the
behaviour of the resulting setup yet.

Thanks!

-- 
Yar