(2014/06/11 1:21), Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:05:07 +0900 > Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> (2014/06/10 7:33), Vlad Yasevich wrote: >> ... >>>>> Rather than special casing this around vlan filtering, I would prefer >>>>> the code always forward these packets, or manipulate group_fwd_mask >>>>> to allow it that way. >>>> >>>> These addresses must be forwarded only if the bridge is an S-VLAN >>>> bridge. When it is a C-VLAN bridge or a .1D bridge, they may not be >>>> forwarded. So, I don't think we can forward them always. >>>> >>>> Using group_fwd_mask is a bit complicated. If we use it to forward them, >>>> user can optionally turn off forwarding ability of those addresses... >>>> but we maybe need another information (named like group_fwd_mask_set) >>>> that indicates which bit is set by user. (We have to set group_fwd_mask >>>> automatically when we set vlan_proto to 88a8.) >>>> Is this way acceptable? >>> >>> May be separate it into required mask and user mask. Set required >>> mask when this is an S-VLAN bridge. >> >> Sounds like a good idea. >> I'll give it a try, thank you for your suggestion. >> >> Thanks, >> Toshiaki Makita >> > > Looking again at the code. > > 1. If doing vlan then it should forward frames as defined in standard > by default. > > 2. For compatiability, and for those users doing bump-on-wire, allow > forwarding via group mask. > Thank you for reviewing. I sent v2 and I'm thinking it can satisfy these two. Thanks, Toshiaki Makita
