From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=xM/5hg73CAO5nDlUiWnC06sBYRoGEVNZps4ThjEK80g=; b=SM1DxTrgTQmc/EbSc5o/ZKIU4t62Dau5mNSp1bsk7iNoKcDtfvVrYZ+dAjdNqwDI4x nzZKOWr7tfhFVPyHPSlQURghDVLrbMfgs43M7gPs+0Uio3Cpz2RTkontu83Eb5mqdD3x OfK85T0Upyl6y/12E5n1WE0FwhaPhAS68b7KKXmpmZfkRI286LwpC3WlK4agL7LGhxYo xeYHLXxFaBRst7J9z64xRfBl0XEtWNcH9VGL5vGE/T6AMbtDcdvXM8PAmExa+LN6S9qr 5RKsTcMQqfMeaucp4c3MObUiIn8thVESL/Uxh5Vp5kfczH7zxWIx/+QUw3kXePwqCkPM meGQ== From: Joachim Wiberg In-Reply-To: <458e3729-0bf0-8c45-9e45-352da76eaeb6@blackwall.org> References: <20210719170637.435541-1-razor@blackwall.org> <875yw1qv9a.fsf@gmail.com> <458e3729-0bf0-8c45-9e45-352da76eaeb6@blackwall.org> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 08:26:09 +0200 Message-ID: <871r6or5ry.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH net-next 00/15] net: bridge: multicast: add vlan support List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Nikolay Aleksandrov , netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, Nikolay Aleksandrov , roopa@nvidia.com On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 19:22, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: > On 19/08/2021 19:01, Joachim Wiberg wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 20:06, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: >>> From: Nikolay Aleksandrov >> Curious, are you planning querier per-vlan, including use-ifaddr support >> as well? In our in-house hack, which I posted a few years ago, we added >> some "dumpster diving" to inet_select_addr(), but it got rather tricky. >> So I've been leaning towards having that in userspace instead. > Yes, that is already supported (use-ifaddr needs attention though). In my next > patch-set where I added the initial global vlan mcast options I added control > for per-vlan querier with per-vlan querier elections and so on. The use-ifaddr > needs more work though, that's why I still haven't added that option. I need > to add the per-vlan/port router control option so we'll have mostly everything > ready in a single release. Wow, OK now we're talking, yeah that would be great to have in place as well! >>> Future patch-sets which build on this one (in order): >>> - iproute2 support for all the new uAPIs >> I'm very eager to try out all the new IGMP per-VLAN stuff, do you have >> any branch of the iproute2 support available yet for testing? > I don't have it public yet because I need to polish the support, currently > it's very rough, enough for testing purposes for these patch-sets. :) > I plan to work on that after I finish with the per-vlan/port router control. Alright, I can appreciate that. Really looking forward to this, I'll be patiently waiting here in the wings, testing this out. Fantastic work with this, again! :) All the best /Joachim