AW: Re: AW: Re: AW: Re: VLAN and Network Drivers 2.4.x

[jd@epcnet.de]

> Von: <greearb@candelatech.com>
> Gesendet: 24.04.2002 20:00
>
> > This creates a support issue.  It's almost impossible to field
> > bug reports effectively once you start letting users do stuff
> > like this. 
> We let users do much worse: rm -fr /
> won't even warn you.

But it would do, what we expect. VLAN on a e.g. unpatched tulip driver is somewhat unpredictable.
You can hope any application is using small packets, but if not things get worse.

>  I'm all for warning the user, but since the
> MTU issue can be worked around by setting the VLAN MTU to 1496,
> and sometimes setting the eth0 MTU to 1504, then putting hard
> restrictions in the kernel sounds like a really bad idea.

This sounds very "experimental". What about the non-VLAN packets on eth0, when you set the MTU
1504?

I like the NETIF_F_VLAN_CHALLENGED capability in the driver itself, which is then tested by the net subsystem on
creation of a VLAN. No more tweaks and fiddling around with MTU and framesizes.

Greetings

      Jochen Dolze