On 02/26/14 10:18, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
This patch series is a complete re-design and re-implementation of prior attempts to support non-promiscuous bridge ports. The basic design is as follows. The bridge keeps track of all the ports that flood packets to unknown destinations. If the flooding is disabled on the port, to get traffic to flow through, user/management would need to add an fdb describing such traffic. When such fdb is added, we save the address to bridge private hardware address list.
Entering the addresses in the uc list on other bridgeports seems reasonable for the scenario described. But would it _also_ need to be added to the fdb of the bridge? i.e how does the bridge (if the packet was to be handed to it) know where to forward? BTW: on the comment that flooding off implies learning off: I would like to be able to turn off flooding on a specific bridge port but still want to learn from it. I dont think those two are mutually exclusive. cheers, jamal
