From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vlad Yasevich Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 00/12] Add basic VLAN support to bridges Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:13:10 -0500 Message-ID: <50D1CB76.50202@redhat.com> References: <1355857263-31197-1-git-send-email-vyasevic@redhat.com> <20121219101006.7086faef@pixies.home.jungo.com> Reply-To: vyasevic@redhat.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@vyatta.com, davem@davemloft.net, or.gerlitz@gmail.com, jhs@mojatatu.com, mst@redhat.com To: Shmulik Ladkani Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39693 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752327Ab2LSONR (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:13:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20121219101006.7086faef@pixies.home.jungo.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/19/2012 03:10 AM, Shmulik Ladkani wrote: > Thanks Vlad, > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:00:51 -0500 Vlad Yasevich wrote: >> A single vlan may also be designated as untagged. Any untagged traffic >> recieved by the port will be assigned to this vlan. > > Why the "untagged vlan" is per-bridge global? > Usually, 802.1q switches define the PVID (port's VID) which controls > the value of VID, in case ingress frame is either untagged or > priority-tagged (per port configuration). > This gives greater flexibility. It's not. There is a per port untagged pointer where you can designate which VLAN is untagged/native on a port. The bride interface itself can also function as a port, so it gets its own untagged pointer so it can behave similar to port. > >> Any traffic exiting >> the port with a VID matching the untagged vlan will exit untagged (the >> bridge will strip the vlan header). This is similar to "Native Vlan" support >> available in most switches. > > 802.1q switches usually allow conifguring per-vlan, per-port > tagged/untagged egress policy: each vid has its port membership map and > an accompanying port egress-policy map. > This gives great flexibility defining all sorts of configurations. Right, and that's what's provided here. * Each VLAN has port membership map (net_bridge_vlan.portgroup). * Each port has a list of vlans configured as well (net_port_vlan.vlan_list). * Each port also has a single vlan that can be untagged (net_bridge_port.untagged). * The bridge also has a single untagged vlan (net_bridge.untagged) The limitation (in switches as well) is that only a single VLAN may be untagged on any 1 port. If you have more then 1, you don't know which VLAN the untagged traffic belongs to. > > Personally, I'd prefer a fully flexible vlan bridge allowing all sorts > of configurations (as available in 802.1q switches). > > What's the reason limiting such configurations? So, what do you see that's missing? -vlad > > Regards, > Shmulik > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >