From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Apr 2 05:52:11 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FEBAF746B2 for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 05:52:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from hz.grosbein.net (hz.grosbein.net [78.47.246.247]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hz.grosbein.net", Issuer "hz.grosbein.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 298266F011 for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 05:52:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (root@eg.sd.rdtc.ru [62.231.161.221] (may be forged)) by hz.grosbein.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w325q3mS004679 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 2 Apr 2018 07:52:03 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) X-Envelope-From: eugen@grosbein.net X-Envelope-To: hf@spg.tu-darmstadt.de Received: from [10.58.0.4] ([10.58.0.4]) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w325pst2073864 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 2 Apr 2018 12:51:54 +0700 (+07) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Subject: Re: Bridging a vlan trunk with a gif tunnel? To: Hauke Fath References: <20180401164209528151.6f554119@spg.tu-darmstadt.de> <5AC101AC.60906@grosbein.net> <20180401231022184335.e841ceaf@spg.tu-darmstadt.de> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org From: Eugene Grosbein Message-ID: <5AC1C4F4.90301@grosbein.net> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 12:51:48 +0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180401231022184335.e841ceaf@spg.tu-darmstadt.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, LOCAL_FROM, RDNS_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Report: * -2.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * 1.9 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS * 2.6 LOCAL_FROM From my domains X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on hz.grosbein.net X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 05:52:11 -0000 02.04.2018 4:10, Hauke Fath wrote: >> or switch to newer vxlan(4). > > That wouldn't work with the switches, would it, like vlans? vxlan is not instead of vlans, it is instead of gifs vxlan is designed to pass trunks over routed network forming its own tunnel. Just read its manual page. >>> and I figured just bridging the exclave with the main site would >>> save me routing issues, >> >> And bring in bridging issues that are more severe. > Like what, besides the shortcomings of if_bridge(4)? Loops, broadcast storms spreading too far over long and slower links, applications and kernels not adopting automatically for "not LAN" conditions like they do in case of separate IP networks, extra overhead and timing issues, poor manageability of if_bridge (unable to show/manage its forwarding tables as opposed to newer vxlan) comparing to rich set of methods developed for routing tables etc.