Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 18:23:31 +0300 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> To: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: ported NetBSD if_bridge Message-ID: <20040418152331.GG12383@ip.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <40814C3B.10906@newsguy.com> References: <20040417035758.GA66806@kate.fud.org.nz> <40814C3B.10906@newsguy.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Z0mFw3+mXTC5ycVe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 12:24:43PM -0300, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: > Andrew Thompson wrote: > >Hi, > > > > > >I have ported over the bridging code from NetBSD and am looking for=20 > >feedback. > >My main question is, 'do people want this in the tree?' > > > > > >The benefits over the current bridge are: > > * ability to manage the bridge table > > * spanning tree support > > * the snazzy brconfig utility > > * clonable pseudo-interface (is that a benefit?) >=20 > My main question is whether I can attach a vlan interface to it and have= =20 > everything work. That is not the case with the present bridge code,=20 > though the Netgraph bridge code _might_ do it (I couldn't get help on=20 > some criticial ng infrastructure to do it). >=20 Offtopic, but ng_bridge(4) + ng_vlan(4) + ng_eiface(4) should just work. Cheers, --=20 Ruslan Ermilov ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer --Z0mFw3+mXTC5ycVe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAgp1zUkv4P6juNwoRAl9yAJ9wGK2Kd9lNfg30oJIfw4BZzsOGLgCcC99R BX3jB3WQcaDsZ40L94WDka0= =lFDx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Z0mFw3+mXTC5ycVe--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040418152331.GG12383>