From owner-freebsd-net Mon Feb 14 17:27: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from dustdevil.waterspout.com (dustdevil.waterspout.com [208.13.60.151]) by builder.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26D3B3FB0; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 17:24:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by dustdevil.waterspout.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5EE364B; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 20:24:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 20:24:34 -0500 From: "C. Stephen Gunn" To: Garrett Wollman Cc: "C. Stephen Gunn" , freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 802.1Q VLANs Message-ID: <20000214202434.A16731@dustdevil.waterspout.com> References: <200002031847.NAA62013@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20000214002142.A12511@dustdevil.waterspout.com> <200002141625.LAA65769@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20000214125527.A14822@dustdevil.waterspout.com> <200002141935.OAA66996@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <200002141935.OAA66996@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:35:39PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: > Um, no. The point of running the VLAN code is to usefully interpret > frames with VLAN tags on them. As the designer of the code in > question, I think I can say that with some certainty. I'm not trying to question the intent of the code in FreeBSD. I was commenting on the special case of tagged/non-tagged frames on the same wire at the same time, and how that case is currently handled. My observation is that a bridge forwards packets based on rules (or VLAN tags) at layer-2. I don't see a difference if this happens on a physical wire, or inside the kernel drivers/protocol stacks. I have several goals (related to VLANs and FreeBSD) and starting an argument is definitely not one of them. Its not my intent to question your expertise, either as the code's architect, or in general. I'm working towards solid features in FreeBSD that I can use to simplify my production network environment. > > I believe it appropriate to make the lower protocol layers on FreeBSD > > comply with the specification for a bridge. > > I do not, unless bridging is actually configured. I see an administrative advantage to having your configuration be similar on all bridges or hosts that understand tagged frames. That's the motivation for my comments. Its entirely possible that I've missed something incredibly important here. Do you have some technical or philosopical reason to deviate from the advise of the published standard? - Steve -- C. Stephen Gunn URL: http://www.waterspout.com/ WaterSpout Communications, Inc. Email: csg@waterspout.com 427 North 6th Street Phone: +1 765.742.6628 Lafayette, IN 47901 Fax: +1 765.742.0646 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message