Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 2010/03/28 05:17:52: > > On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:50:23 +0100 > Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > "richardvoigt@xxxxxxxxx" <richardvoigt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on 2010/03/26 22:42:52: > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Joakim Tjernlund > > > <joakim.tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nicolas de Pesloüan <nicolas.2p.debian@xxxxxxx> wrote on 2010/03/26 21:39:33: > > > > > > > >> From: Nicolas de Pesloüan <nicolas.2p.debian@xxxxxxx> > > > >> To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > >> Cc: bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >> Date: 2010/03/26 21:39 > > > >> Subject: Re: IP address on physcial interface instead of > bridge interface? > > > >> > > > >> Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Figure a small picture will help so here it is: > > > >> > > > > >> > Before adding eth0 to br0: > > > >> > eth0 br0 > > > >> > | > > > >> > | > > > >> > HW controller > > > >> > > > > >> > after adding eth0 to br0: > > > >> > eth0 > > > >> > \ > > > >> > \ > > > >> > br0 > > > >> > / > > > >> > / > > > >> > HW controller > > > >> > > > >> I don't understand your ascii art. What is HW controller ? eth0 is an hardware > > > >> controller !? > > > >> > > > >> Nicolas. > > > > > > > > eth0 is the I/F IP stack will see/use. HW controller is the ethernet HW > controller, > > > > the PCI HW if you like. > > > > > > No! > > > > > > br0 does NOT sit between eth0 and the NIC. eth0 still represents the > > > NIC. br0 sits on top, and represents the combined traffic stream from > > > eth0 and all other bridge ports. By adding eth0 to the bridge, you > > > told it to forward all incoming frames to br0 which is the next higher > > > layer in the virtual interface hierarchy. > > > > Of course the above isn't how the bridge works today. I was trying > > to described a new feature which would let me use eth0 as my normal > > IP interface even after it was added to the bridge. > > The above would emulate connecting the eth0 I/F to an external HW bridge. > > If you read the network receive code path in the kernel, you > will see that there is a special hook used. Basically, > > if received_interface_is_part_of_bridge(incoming_interface) > then process_bridged_packet(packet) > > Then bridge looks at packet and decides whether it is local or forwarded. > The problem is with your application if it wants to use eth0 directly. Right, what seems to be missing is at similar hook for TX path? If a TX hook existed(I am guessing there isn't one) then it would be relative simple to redirect pks from the IP stack to the bride instead instead of the HW driver? Jocke _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
