Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:42:42 +0100 (CET) From: "Pedro J. Lobo" <pjlobo@euitt.upm.es> To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Cc: <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: 802.1q vlans and STABLE Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0102231023240.44042-100000@odin.euitt.upm.es> In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20010222215259.03d78d60@marble.sentex.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Mike Tancsa wrote: > Hi, > are vlans and the fxp driver ready for prime time ? To be honest, there is still a minor problem (see the end of the message). > I have a situation where I would like to deploy a simple network which > looks like > > > [network vlan #1]-----[cat5500]-----[network vlan #2] > | > | > | > [freebsd fxp0] > > The two remote networks would be trunked back to me using 802.1q encaps off > a cat 5500 switch. I am using the patch at > http://www.euitt.upm.es/~pjlobo/fbsdvlan.html > to account for larger frame sizes. Whats not clear to me is that when > configuring fxp0, do I just assign it IPs via the vlan interface, or should > I also give fxp0 a normal IP. The usual situation is to only assign IP addresses to the VLAN interfaces, so you would have in rc.conf: network_interfaces="fxp0 vlan0 vlan1" ifconfig_fxp0="up" ifconfig_vlan0="inet xx.xx.xx.xx netmask yy.yy.yy.yy vlan #1 vlandev fxp0" ifconfig_vlan1="inet zz.zz.zz.zz netmask aa.aa.aa.aa vlan #2 vlandev fxp0" > Will it break things if fxp0 has an IP associated with it ? No, it won't. Just be aware that not all switches will allow you to use tagged and non-tagged frames on the same port. > Also, does aliasing of vlan interfaces work as expected ? Yes. > Is there a limit as to the # of vlan interfaces ? Also, do I have any > performance hits if I have too many vlans ? If I recall correctly, in > LINUX, there used to be a performance hit if you had too many interfaces. Don't know for sure. I have a router with 3 cards and 12 vlans, and that's what uptime says right now: caronte:pjlobo> uptime 10:21AM up 150 days, 2:32, 1 user, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 The machine is a PII-400 with 32 MB of RAM, and its performance is quite decent. I haven't done any torture tests, but it doesn't appear to be very busy looking at the cpu times: CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.4% system, 4.7% interrupt, 95.0% idle As for the problem I spoke of, this is it: caronte:pjlobo> netstat -ib Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Ibytes Opkts Oerrs Obytes Coll fxp0 1500 <Link#1> 00:90:27:8c:f9:f4 464689332 0 66292389 727275472 0 0 0 fxp0 1500 none none 464689332 0 66292389 727275472 0 0 0 fxp1 1500 <Link#2> 00:90:27:8c:fa:92 250841282 0 3715740027 294179467 0 0 0 fxp1 1500 none none 250841282 0 3715740027 294179467 0 0 0 fxp2 1500 <Link#3> 00:d0:b7:09:cc:e8 895025963 0 3489296215 670473207 0 994515613 0 fxp2 1500 138.100.87.16 138.100.87.18 895025963 0 3489296215 670473207 0 994515613 0 vlan0 1500 <Link#4> 00:90:27:8c:f9:f4 503740779 0 969833213 700887254 0 2896942987 0 vlan0 1500 138.100.52/25 caronte 503740779 0 969833213 700887254 0 2896942987 0 [...] fxp0/1 are vlan-only devices, and fxp2 is a "normal" device with no vlans defined. As you may see, the vlan-enabled devices doesn't count the output bytes. This is true only for the physical devices (fxp0 and fxp1), as the virtual devices (vlanXX) do it right. I haven't found the time to investigate this, because I can live with it and (like most of us) am loaded with tons of work. Cheers, Pedro. -- Pedro José Lobo Perea Tel: +34 913367819 / Fax: +34 913319229 Centro de Cálculo e-mail: pjlobo@euitt.upm.es E.U.I.T. Telecomunicación Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Ctra. de Valencia, Km. 7 E-28031 Madrid - España / Spain To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.33.0102231023240.44042-100000>