From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 22 Jun 2001 02:37:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 22 Jun 2001 02:37:01 -0400 Received: from cx97923-a.phnx3.az.home.com ([24.9.112.194]:35550 "EHLO grok.yi.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 22 Jun 2001 02:36:57 -0400 Message-ID: <3B32E77B.8102DA15@candelatech.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:36:43 -0700 From: Ben Greear Organization: Candela Technologies X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Albert D. Cahalan" CC: "Peter C. Norton" , Sander Steffann , vlan@Scry.WANfear.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Holger Kiehl , "David S. Miller" , Lennert , Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [VLAN] Should VLANs be devices or something else? In-Reply-To: <200106220627.f5M6RSF415308@saturn.cs.uml.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Albert D. Cahalan" wrote: > > > Should VLANs be devices or some other thing? > > What is good for PPP-over-Ethernet is good for VLANs, > which are basically Ethernet-over-Ethernet. So, um, for those fortunate enough not to need PPPoE, are they devices or what? -- Ben Greear President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear