From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 7 17:57:27 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 664B0106566B for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 17:57:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from csalgau-br@bitdefender.com) Received: from mail.bitdefender.com (mail.bitdefender.com [91.199.104.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8B88FC12 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 17:57:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 15665 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2010 19:57:24 +0200 Received: from bitdefender.is.ew.ro (HELO ?192.168.70.65?) (csalgau@bitdefender.com@81.181.91.206) by mail.bitdefender.com with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 7 Dec 2010 19:57:24 +0200 Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 19:57:14 +0200 From: Mihai-Catalin Salgau X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1466741156.20101207195714@bitdefender.com> To: Jack Vogel In-Reply-To: References: <07255796.20101207031807@bitdefender.com> <201012070933.13710.jhb@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BitDefender-Spam: No (0) X-BitDefender-SpamStamp: v1, build 2.8.97.118769, SQMD Hits: InvalidIPBytes34 97.41.107.111, rbl score: 0(0), bayes score: 500(0), pbayes score: 500(0), neunet score: 0(0), flags: [NN_LEGIT_BITDEFENDER], SQMD: 965452724f87b39e94b57b6dfe58fe0d.fuzzy.fzrbl.org, total: 0(775) X-BitDefender-Scanner: Clean, Agent: BitDefender qmail 3.1.0 on elfie.dsd.hq, sigver: 7.34955 Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Mihai-Catalin Salgau , John Baldwin Subject: Re: vlan limits on e1000? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 17:57:27 -0000 Hello Jack, Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 7:46:32 PM, you wrote: > Same thing I was thinking, there is nothing else that should limit vlans in > any way. > Jack > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 6:33 AM, John Baldwin wrote: >> On Monday, December 06, 2010 8:18:07 pm Mihai-Catalin Salgau wrote: >> > Hello Freebsd-net, >> > >> > I have two dual port NICs, one Broadcom(bce0,bce1) and one >> Intel(em0,em1), on FreeBSD 8-stable >> > (about two weeks old) with a DHCP server running. >> > I've been successfully using a large number of vlans over bce1,em0 and >> em1 with iSCSI, >> > but wanted to switch to AoE(ata over ethernet). I've set vlandevs by >> round-robin, and got >> > vlan1 on bce0, vlan2 on em0, vlan3 on em1, vlan4 on bce0....vlan12 on >> em1. I've binded >> > net/vblade instances to each interface, but the problem I'm facing now >> is that while >> > vlans 1-10 are working properly, vlans 11 and 12 won't see any traffic >> unless the interface is >> > in promiscuous mode. I noticed that while trying to attach tcpdump and >> saw the thing instantly work. >> > I've had no problems with iSCSI over the same setup, and dhcp packets >> are getting trough properly. >> > I've moved those last two vlans to bce0 and they work ok, but I'm a bit >> locked on why this is happening. >> > Are there any known limitations on vlans on e1000? >> >> Are you using the 'vlanhwfilter' feature? >> >> -- >> John Baldwin No, I'm not using it. em0&em1 have RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4 enabled The Broadcom has RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO I've also tried disabling vlanhwtag and enabling vlanhwfilter, but it doesn't help. Still, the moment I switch the interface to promiscuous mode, it works. I've also tried setting 8 vlans on bce1 to see if there's a limit per driver for some reason, but it works ok.