Simon Barber <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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? > > Simon > > > Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > Joakim Tjernlund/Transmode wrote on 22/08/2009 17:36:54: > > > >> Simon Barber <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 22/08/2009 16:34:11: > >> > >>> Hi Joakim, > >>> > >>> Look back a month or so in the archives - you'll find an email from me > >>> referencing a patch to make the bridge VLAN aware. It's a little old, > >>> and needs updating for 2.6 (it was written for 2.4) - but should not be > >>> much work to get it done. There is a matching patch for the brctl utility. > >>> > >>> Simon > >>> > >>> > >> Thanks Simon > >> > >> Do you mean the "bridge vlan integration" patch? > >> It is not clear to me if this would support the case > >> described in B.1.3(802.1Q-2005), does it? > >> > >> Seems like there is little interest to post this to 2.6 and > >> I am not sure how welcome this would be either, perhaps > >> the bridge maintainer could comment? > >> > >> Jocke > >> > > > > Thinking a bit more about this I could envision some changes to the > > vlan code too. I image one could create one vlan interface which will listen > > to several VLANs. One VLAN is the primary VLAN and is used in the tx path > > by default. The bridge would be able to filter on individual VLANs received > > from such interface and be able to chose outgoing VLAN too. > > > > Jocke > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
