"richardvoigt@xxxxxxxxx" <richardvoigt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on 2010/03/25 18:03:34: > > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Joakim Tjernlund > <joakim.tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Currently it isn't possible to to have an IP address on one of interfaces > > attached to a bridge, one must always put the IP address on the bridge > interface itself. > > > > I wonder if there is a technical reason for that? I would love to be able > > to be able to chose any ONE interface attached to the bridge. > > Example: > > Assume br0 bridge with two interfaces attached, eth0 and eth1. > > Then I would like to assign the IP address to eth0 instead of > > br0. Ideally one should be able to just attach eth0 with an existing IP address > > to br0. > > Migrating existing configuration to the bridge at the time a port is > added (and back to one member when the bridge is dissolved) has been > discussed quite a bit recently, and is completely different from > trying to independently configure L3 state of bridge ports at > arbitrary times. Sorry but I could not find that discussion but it doesn't sound as what I was after. Basically I want the eth0 I/F keeping its IP address and take over the roll of the br0 I/F when it has an IP address. Jocke _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
