From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 4 11:32:09 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E8316A41F for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 11:32:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (comp.chem.msu.su [158.250.32.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96FFF43D45 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 11:32:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j94BW0lU033642; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 15:32:00 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: (from yar@localhost) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j94BW0ik033637; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 15:32:00 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from yar) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 15:31:59 +0400 From: Yar Tikhiy To: Gavin Atkinson Message-ID: <20051004113159.GB28705@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <1128196122.7015.38.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1128196122.7015.38.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vlan(4), bge(4) and bringing parent interface up 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, 04 Oct 2005 11:32:09 -0000 On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 08:48:42PM +0100, Gavin Atkinson wrote: > > It seems to me that assigning an IP address to a vlan device (parent > device bge0) isn't enough to get the interface working - I need to > manually bring the parent interface up. Yes you need. The UP flag on an interface is administrative; that is, it is you who is in control of the flag. Some interfaces try to frob UP theirselves, but it is bogus and will be gone some day. > Is this expected? I suspect it's a bug in either the vlan layer, or the > bge interface code, but if it is expected it would be good to see this > documented. I don't ever remember having to do anything special to get > fxp cards working with vlans. I always bring an fxp up before attaching vlans to it, so I've never noticed fxp to touch its UP flag. If fxp does so, it is buggy and in need of fixing. -- Yar