From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [Bridge] VLANs and bridge Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:00:44 +0200 Message-ID: <4A93EE8C.6040008@trash.net> References: <4A9001E3.6060506@superduper.net> <4A9026EA.9020404@superduper.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Simon Barber , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Joakim Tjernlund Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:46840 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752906AbZHYOAp (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:00:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > Simon Barber wrote on 22/08/2009 19:12:10: >> Looking through B.1.3 it looks like the patch would need some >> enhancement. It provides a good basis - handling tagging/untagging and >> filtering, but would need a way to specify the untagged vlan separately >> for in and out. > > I see. Perhaps the VLAN maintainer(CC:ed) can comment too. Especially about extending > the VLAN code to allowed several VLANs in one interface? Just accepting additional VIDs on one VLAN device should be a relatively trivial change, all you need to do is call vlan_group_set_device() with the additional VIDs. I'd suggest to add something similar to the QoS-mapping lists in vlan_netlink.c for the additional VIDs.