Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:58:53 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sten_Daniel_S=F8rsdal?= <lists@wm-access.no> To: Dmitry Pryanishnikov <dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: if_rl VLAN support in RELENG_4 Message-ID: <44B5547D.1070700@wm-access.no> In-Reply-To: <20060712091022.A65006@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> References: <20060705125957.T30599@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <44B4882F.6060200@wm-access.no> <20060712091022.A65006@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote: > > Hello! > > On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Sten Daniel S?rsdal wrote: >>> In RELENG_4, RealTek 8129/8139 driver rl(4) doesn't claim VLAN support >>> (when I assign vlandev rl0, my vlan device initially gets mtu 1496). In >>> modern (e.g. RELENG_6) systems if_rl claims native VLAN support. I've >>> tried setting 'ifconfig vlan0 mtu 1500' for rl-based vlan device, and >>> resulting interface Just Works (TM) (1500-byte packets trasmit and >>> receive >>> correctly via such a vlan). So is it safe to use vlan with 'vlandev rl0' >>> and 'mtu 1500' in RELENG_4? Has anyone observed any ill-effects in such >>> a configuration? Would it be simple enough for if_rl in RELENG_4 to >>> just announce native VLAN support to the system? >>> >>> Sincerely, Dmitry >> >> Not necessarily. I would assume, without looking, that you would also >> need to enable oversized frame support. > > I'm curious whether you've missed the following: > >>> I've >>> tried setting 'ifconfig vlan0 mtu 1500' for rl-based vlan device, and >>> resulting interface Just Works (TM). > > So the required support seems to be already enabled (at least for my > particular NIC). It isn't question for me whether _my_ NIC works in this > mode - it definitely does. My question is whether _any_ rl(4)-supported > card will behave in the same way ( = can I _rely_ on rl(4) in RELENG_4 > being able to do 1500-byte VLANs). In RELENG_6, e.g., this capability is > announced by the Aha. I'm not sure i can answer that. I was under the impression that not all realtek cards supported oversized frames (notably 8129 with an external phy) and that 8139 A and B series were a little shakey but C is definitly fine. 8139 had internal PHY so i guess they (a/b/c) are pretty similar. I can however not really give you the answer you are looking for, sorry. -- Sten Daniel Sørsdal
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44B5547D.1070700>