From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:03:20 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger Message-ID: <20080815150320.0b2e7146@extreme> In-Reply-To: <48A5EF12.5030902@free.fr> References: <48A0B4AD.6030703@free.fr> <20080811163159.49cf9980@extreme> <48A5E1E3.5060907@free.fr> <48A5EF12.5030902@free.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Bridge] frame destinated to individual port MAC address List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Benoit PAPILLAULT Cc: Bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 23:03:14 +0200 Benoit PAPILLAULT wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 >=20 > Malcolm Scott a =C3=A9crit : > | At 22:06 today, Benoit PAPILLAULT wrote: > | > |> I am in a very preliminary phase, trying to learn how to implement > |> routing and bridging under Linux. In order for the routing protocol to > |> have proper topology view, it somehow needs to assign a unique IP on a= ll > |> interfaces and for bridging and those interfaces needs to be in the sa= me > |> bridge. > | > | By my understanding (and it's a while since I read that paper so I > might be > | wrong) you don't need unique IP addresses on all interfaces; > everything uses > | MAC addresses. To quote section 4.2 of the draft: > | > | o it runs directly over Layer 2, so therefore may be run with zero > | configuration (no IP addresses need to be assigned) > | >=20 > Correct since the spec is using IS-IS. However, i'd like to use OSPF > instead. I'm reading IS-IS and OSPF details to understand whever a > unique IP is needed per interface. A single IP over the whole would be > more convenient I must admit. >=20 Linux has weak-address model so IP per interface is not going to do what you expect. Use SO_BINDTODEVICE